The Blue Dogs Have To Much Power In The House Of Representatives! Congresswoman Waters Video

http://MOXNews.com/
November 09, 2009 CNN

Save & Share:

NwZ2: really? REALLY? this amendment LITERALLY affects their rights BEYOND obama's mandate that the government wouldn't (and rightfully so) fund abortions...it affects *their* ABILITY to get coverage for it via their insurance through PRIVATE means. You think that if it was the reverse in some way, the right wouldn't be all over this shit? Fucking hypocrites. Republicans ALWAYS get what they fucking want cause they SHOUT the loudest and are fascists. Period. I wish the dems would grow a pair

soundmoneyfan: Forcing tax dollars to go for abortions is like forcing me to fund wars I morally object to, it is not fair to those that have a moral objection. No one will stick up for me but at least some one stuck up for the pro lifers. who knows who the crazy pro lifers would have shot in public if this passed, those doctors killers are crazy

LoryLandskipper: It effects low income women directly. Sure, it's fine in your perfect world for a woman to pay for it herself, when she can afford it. For women who CAN'T afford it, how can she afford to pay to feed the kid? Look you numskull, on one hand you say the public shouldn't pay for her abortion, but guess what? The public will be paying for the child ONCE IT'S BORN, and that costs far more. Absolutely no foresight from you people.

LoryLandskipper: yeah YOU should be on TV. People want to listen to you...

gsuitter: We were told this legislation would give us choice. It would not effect people who wanted to participate in private insurance. Now that the government plan won't cover abortion the truth comes out. Once in the government plan you can never leave the government plan or participate in any private insurance. And this is called "choice" and "competition"? I call it a bunch of lies.

gsuitter: "Why buy insurance for abortion"? "Who knows in advance if they are going to get an abortion"? Who knows in advance if they are going to have a heart attack or get cancer? Why buy home insurance if you don't know for sure if your house is going to catch fire or not? What a dumb ass.

JixMa: "The Blue Dogs Have Too Much Power In The House Of Representatives! Congresswoman Waters" Then just treat them as the REPIGLICANS that they really are! Fucking worthless, spineless Dumb-O'crats!

JixMa: I'm actually dismayed that this shitty bill passed. I saw another MoxNews video posted where I found out thru Dennis Kucinich speaking to Greta Van Susteren that he voted against it due to the fact that it makes it compulsory that everyone gets health care thru these fucking private insurance companies. He points out how bill was gutted & defeats whole purpose of USA going for a universal health care system. If D. Kucinich is against this fucking bill, it MUST be bad! See: watch?v=zC-A7UdRj60

Melpheos1er: Great bill... No strong public option (that might not be in the bill after the Senate) , anti aborption rules (that will stay in the bill after the Senate. Result : the republican has won despite being outnumbered...

MooseOfReason: Geraldo Rivera then.

millgiass: It SHOULDNT cover abortion for ANYONE.

whoo689: Instead of whining to CNN or Joy Behar, why don't the liberal Dems complain to SPEAKER PELOSI about "blue dogs having too much power"? After all, she runs things in the House, pretty much!

whoo689: Lol. Joy Behar, what a joke. She actually thinks it's OK for the gov't to fund abortions? Even I, a prochoice man, am against funding abortion with tax dollars! This is too controversial an issue! Gov't must stay out, for the most part. It's a societal thing. Let society handle it, not gov't with more regulations or funding of antiabortion or prochoice initiatives. Obama is wrong: gov't has no place stopping abortions OR trying to "reduce the number of abortions." NONE.

whoo689: By funding abortions or funding prolife clinics that are meant to prevent abortions, gov't is taking a stance, whether intentionally or not. We cannot allow that. This is too big and controversial an issue for the tax dollars to fund something only half the population wants but the other half doesn't. Private sources should fund or defund abortion on their own. As a libertarian, I don't believe in gov't funding ANY private sector stuff other than construction to build some gov't projects.

whoo689: Not only is it unconstitutional, but it's imprudent. All these stupid-ass earmarks annoy the hell outta me! How was it the Founders intent to distribute FEDERAL money to benefit only one state or one district?? Of course, if you don't "bring home the bacon", you're as good as dead electorally. I'd probably not survive because I have integrity and would uphold my values as a Congressman, not wimp out on the basis of "transparency", as Ron Paul claims when he puts these things in bills.

whoo689: The Dems, esp. the women ones, have wanted abortion funding in insurance for YEARS! Now they're giddy cuz the public option gives them a chance to do so, or through bill mandates that can force private insurers to do so, despite the fact that it's not a necessary 'medical procedure', per se. If a private insurer wants to cover it, fine! But don't force the industry to do it. Tough shit. Show them that there are enough women who want that coverage, and maybe the companies will provide it.

whoo689: If a private company wants to cover abortions, that's great! Fine. Let em. But don't force the rest of taxpayers to fund it through Medicaid or public option coverage. Just b/c you can do it doesn't mean you should. Let abortion stay a societal issue. Government really should stay out of these social issues. Gay marriage included. Marriage shouldn't even be a STATE function! It should be merely a private ceremony, with no need to get a legal contract or prenup. Ya know?

whoo689: Maxine Waters is a bumbling fool. Always has been, always will. I'd feel sorry if she were my Congresswoman. She's the dumbass who said "Fannie and Freddie have done such a great job! Let's expand their mission" essentially.

whoo689: So much for fair and balanced, eh? Joy put on not one, not 2, but THREE people on the same side of this issue. And all of them are WOMEN! Can't we at least have one man? What, are men not allowed to have an opinion on this? Come on... This isn't even debating abortion itself but merely taxpayer funding.

whoo689: By these women's logic, I suppose funding viagra through Medicare is alright too, for horny old men. Or forcing insurers to pay for antidepressants for people who may or may not even HAVE the chemical imbalances, who may just be unable to handle stress in their lives. Not happenin, ladies. No taxpayer funding of this crap at all. Deal with it. The sky is not gonna fall. The world isn't ending.

whoo689: Hijack healthcare reform, Ms. NARAL? Look in the mirror. YOU guys wanna hijack healthcare reform for your own little petty extreme prochoice interests!! I'm not anti-woman or "anti-choice" (although I think that's a disgusting labeling of a semi-legitimate position), but I'm not crazy or a partisan, either. These prochoice groups always make it seem like the one defining factor of being a Western woman is the right to choose. It's absurd, really. What about all the other great things?

NwZ2: and? not everyone @ fox is bad yet OVERALL there's a major effort to appeal to a right slant AS WELL AS numerous examples of bias and complete and total factual incorrectness. Nothing near the sort can be said of MSNBC.

MooseOfReason: NwZ2, You'll have to convince Campbell Brown of CNN, then, because she (rightfully) thinks MSNBC has a left-leaning bias. If you look through 'NewsBusters' articles, you'll see examples of MSNBC bias. Do you have examples of "factual incorrectness" at FOX?

NwZ2: @LiberalViewer has a long playlist full of examples, to name a few.

waltermh111: Does NewsBusters also show all the examples of NBC bias leaning to the right? Seriously, NBC was pro-bush for years. Chris Matthews even voted Bush. Scarborough is the local NBC conservative. I admit, it has far more liberals then conservatives, but sheesh, even the liberals criticize Obama. But nobody complaining about Bias wants to acknowledge that truth huh? It seems that if you agree with Obama on any of his policies your too biased. Or is it half? Wheres your line?

Author: MoxNewsDotCom; Uploaded: Nov 10, 2009; Duration: 8:10; Views: 809

Tags: congresswoman  waters  nancy  keenan  julie  menin  health  care  bill  stupak  office of fair trading ofsted reports office angels officers club office depot ofsted official uk top 40 ofcom oft office