Blitz to support Stupak challenger starts

Now all that needs to happen (0.00 / 0)

is for someone to put up a diary on Kos and stand back and watch the tidal wave...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Thu Mar 11, 2010 at 16:37:13 PM UTC

I assume you're being sarcastic? (4.00 / 2)

There's been at least a dozen diaries about Saltonstall over there in the past 2 days (2 of which by myself), several of which have made the Rec list, and most of which include the ActBlue links.

FWIW, at this writing, she's up to around $12,000 via ActBlue.

---

by: Brainwrap @ Thu Mar 11, 2010 at 20:11:08 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stupak & Saltonstall (0.00 / 0)

I don't think he was being sarcastic.

Regardless, Saltonstall will be old news by August regardless of what happens with health care.  Stupak is loved by Yoopers and he's gained a lot of love in Northeast Michigan as well.  He typically leads local ballots.  Saltonstall has the handicap of neither being from the U.P. nor from Northeast Michigan.  She's from one of the three northwestern L.P. counties in Stupak's district and perhaps the most Republican county (Charlevoix).  She would actually have a better chance running against Stupak as a pro-choice Republican and that is no chance at all.  She would have to raise $1 million to even have a shot at beating Stupak in the primary and even then would very likely hand the seat to the Republicans in November.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 01:20:14 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm angry enough... (0.00 / 0)

Since he first started being a dick about HCR last fall, I've been getting more and more enraged.  For me, his latest antics were the last straw.  Handing the seat to a Republican is just about worth it for me, knowing that Bart will no longer be around to piss inside the tent.  I live less than 10 miles away from the southwestern border of his district, and his staffer was quite rude to me when I called to vent, though I was more than polite to her.  I'm definitely in for $20 for Saltonstall!

---

by: DemfromMidland @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 05:34:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wrong Battle (4.00 / 1)

Not sure this is the right battle for progressives to be picking for the moment.  Unlike someone like a Joe Lieberman, Stupak is quite literally liberal on every other issue but abortion.  He gave one of the most epic anti-Iraq-invasion speeches I've heard yet on the floor of the House.  And, if he comes around to vote for health care, which I believe he will, this won't really have been a huge issue.

No, he's not my favorite Democrat in Michigan's delegation, but he's certainly not the worst, or even the most conservative of the bunch, to be honest (i.e. take a look at Schauer and Peters).

I could definitely see myself routing for Saltonstall on the grounds of making Stupak know that his grandstanding wasn't appreciated, though.  EVERY congressperson needs to be reminded every once and again that they are not invincible, and that they can be expendable.  I was quite pleased, for instance that Mama Kilpatrick down in Detroit was put on watch in 2008 and warned that she had better get her house in order.  

Stupak doesn't necessarily need to be replaced, but he does need to know that he's being watched, and being watched more vigilantly than ever before.  He needs to know that holding up one of the most consequential and influential bills in modern American history because of his own cultural hold-ups WILL NOT be tolerated, again.

---

by: MiddleGrandGuy @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 03:23:17 AM UTC

I agree with just about everything you said, but... (0.00 / 0)

...the thing is, Stupak is basically being a dick on two key issues here--he's threatening to destroy the best shot at healthcare reform (a key Democratic principle) in decades, while simultaneously making certain that another opportunity won't come around for decades more--and he's doing it all because of his extremist views about another key progressive principle (ie, reproductive rights).

Saltonstall may prove to be a lousy candidate. She may simply be too left-wing for the district. And she may end up losing a safe (D) seat to a Republican, assuming she manages to win the primary. However, as you say, at the very least, this should put some pressure on Stupak, and I do have to give her credit for being willing to stick her neck into a race that she knows is gonna come with a ton of nasty attacks on her and her family.

On the other hand, given the breaking news about the House Dems basically calling Stupak's bluff and telling him to go pound sand, the issue may be about to resolve itself anyway.

If the HCR bill passes as is in spite of Stupak's threats (and especially if he himself caves and votes for it after all), then the early spike in interest in Ms. Saltonstall will likely mostly dry up, since the very issue that caused her to run will become moot.

If, on the other hand, the HCR bill fails because of Stupak--thus dooming the Dems to lose the House and possibly even the Senate come November--then progressive rage will be focused squarely on taking it out of Stupak's hide, and Saltonstall has a fighting chance (even if she loses the General).

---

by: Brainwrap @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 03:36:12 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Majority (0.00 / 0)

Again, there is an 83 seat Democratic majority in the U.S. House.  Stupak is 1 vote.  He is leading a Pro-Life contingent of 12 other Congresspeople.  So, that leaves 70 other Democratic "no" votes unaccounted for.  The media is acting like Stupak and pro-Life Dems are the key hold-up to the House vote.  That's nowhere close to being true.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 12:07:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Actually... (0.00 / 0)

...an 83-seat majority (less right now with Massa's resignation and Murtha's passing) means that if 40 or so members flip and join the solidly-no GOP bloc, HCR fails.

And there are a number of Blue Dogs, Democratic freshmen in "red" districts and principled opponents like Dennis Kucinich who have already eaten into that 40-vote cushion.

Meaning, Stupak and his 11-12 other single-issue internal saboteurs actually have leverage.

That said, I can't help but think you already knew the math, and the potential whip count for and against.

---

by: helzapoppn @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 12:54:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Math (4.00 / 1)

Your math doesn't conflict with my math.  But it's interesting that Kucinich is giving a pass for his principled opposition while Stupak is not.  The bottom line is that in order for health care reform to fail, it would take a lot more Democratic "no" votes that simply Stupak and 11 other pro-Life Dems.  Yet, we never seem to hear much about the other 70.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 13:27:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Kucinich not "getting a pass" (0.00 / 0)

Kos, for one, really has it in for Dennis. He's also been called out by MSNBC and elsewhere (to the point where the only favorable forum he could find to defend himself was Democracy Now).

On the other hand, Kucinich really is "just one vote." He isn't claiming 11 single-issue followers who will also oppose the bill unless they get their way, even if it means the bill fails and we lose the House in November.

---

by: helzapoppn @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 13:44:02 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stupak (0.00 / 0)

It's my understanding that federal funding of abortion isn't only problem Stupak has with the legislation.  It is just the one that grabs the most attention.  Stupak is also just one vote.  Members of Congress aren't sheep.  The other 11 aren't under Stupak's spell.  They each have their own voters they are accountable to.

Working for a district that overlaps Stupak's, I witness on a daily basis the very angry opposition to this legislation even from many Democrats.  A lot of it is based on misinformation.  A lot of it is fear of change regardless of the very negative change that would result without reform.  And a lot of it is the government cost of health care reform at a time when the United States government is already borrowing heavily, particularly from overseas creditors.

Even though I'm pro-Life, I support the health care reform bill before Congress.  But I don't fault Stupak for voting his district rather than voting the "progressive values" of the Kos crowd.  He was elected to represent Michigan's 1st Congressional District, not a political party or a set of political values.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 14:00:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks (0.00 / 0)

for making clear that you believe that health care reform is only a "progressive values" issue and that Stupak thinks that the abortion issue should trump health care reform for all Americans.  

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 14:21:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Health care reform (4.00 / 2)

Health care reform isn't the issue.  Getting this particular health care reform bill through is the issue.  Frankly what's left is actually health insurance reform rather than actual health care reform.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 14:54:20 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What's left (0.00 / 0)

Let's not forget how this has been watered down from what "the progressives" wanted. It's the Stupaks of the party that have been doing the Republicans dirty work on this bill.  

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 02:54:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Watering down health care (0.00 / 0)

As much as I prefer free market choices on most issues, on some things like public education, utilities, transportation, national security and basic non-elective health care, it makes more economic sense to have those sectors in public control.  

The health care reform legislation before Congress is a major disappointment even if it's an improvement on the current system.  My preference would be to see a single-payer system for basic non-elective health care operating side-by-side with a free market for things like cosmetic surgery, bariatric surgery and reproductive services like vasectomies and prescriptions for Viagra and the pill.

---

by: Brady @ Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 18:18:14 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stupak (0.00 / 0)

is interested in placing his single issue over any improvement in health care. Your earlier comment implied that this is simply about health insurance reform. Health care reform goes hand-in-hand with insurance reform.  

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 03:22:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Also (0.00 / 0)

"[W]e never seem to hear much about the other 70" because they're not going on the air every day with their single-issue demands and threats.

---

by: helzapoppn @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 13:47:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Which suggests (0.00 / 0)

we can afford to lose some Dems and get a more unified caucus...

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 16:30:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

November 3 (0.00 / 0)

Your opinion on that issue may change on November 3.

---

by: Brady @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 16:36:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why? (0.00 / 0)

I have no loyalty to the democratic Party.

While it would suck that the Republicans would take over, it is Democrats like Stupak that are creating the environment for loosing...

You know, the same centrist DLC Bullshit that gave us 1994.

Something tells me that the Dems need to get hit on the head a couple more times before they start acting like a party with balls and intelligence.

It will be Democrats like Bart Stupak who will have given us two years of Chairwoman Bachmann.

You should save your concern trolling for Stupak.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 18:59:25 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

On another note (4.00 / 1)

progressives in the caucus were forced to eat sh*t sandwich after sh*t sandwich on this issue and expected to go along with the party line.

Bart throws a hissy fit and expects everything to come to a grinding halt because he wants to go beyond where we are on the issue of abortion...

Sorry, but Bart deserves all the derision he is getting...he is adding insult to injury with the progressive caucus, which has given up far more on numerous occasion to satisfy the "centrist" blue dogs.

So Bart can suck it up and compromise, just like everyone else (not really) or face the consequences of his actions!

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 19:07:26 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You might wan to tell that (0.00 / 0)

to Stupak.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 03:50:02 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right Battle (4.00 / 1)

EDIT: I TOTALLY forgot about Stupak in The Family.  Yeah, his Yooper @ss can go as far as I'm concerned.  That's just one too many strikes, right there.

---

by: MiddleGrandGuy @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 03:29:09 AM UTC

If you hang around the barbe shop long enough - eventually you're going to get a haircut (0.00 / 0)

If you look at his voting record -- he's really not very liberal at all.  His involvement with the C Street folks is problematic in the extreme.  Not because of their "religious" beliefs but just by sheer dint of the fact that he lives in a house with a bunch of other representatives -- who are all conservative Republicans.  

If he's so liberal -- why would he WANT to live in a house with a bunch of conservatives?

---

by: Buster Vainamoinen @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 13:13:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He must be feeling a little heat (0.00 / 0)

or why else would he start crying about repealing NAFTA...he wouldn't be trying to shore up his union support, now would he?

This is why primaries are good things...they can correct bad behavior (and no Brady, his position isn't bad, it is the manner in which he is pursuing it and the fact he is misrepresenting what is actually in the bill).

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 16:29:30 PM UTC

Stupak (0.00 / 0)

Let's not be so certain there's a Stupak lovefest covering YooperLand. C Street hangs around his neck so he moves out, but to where? It's a safe house C Street owns and dollars to donuts he'll not respond if you ask him about it. Seemingly of no interest is the fact he also skirts the issue of who pays (or at least supplements) his monthly rent. That being the case has he listed this "in kind" contribition on his 1040?

Sure would be interesting to see what his 2008 1040 looks like in comparison to what he's filed and/or amended for 2009.

---

by: cueball @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 17:12:50 PM UTC

Yooperland (0.00 / 0)

I'm in Yooperland and I'm here to tell you that the relationship between Stupak and his constituents falls considerably short of a "lovefest."

---

by: Buster Vainamoinen @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 18:47:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yooperland (0.00 / 0)

Being a Copper Country yooper myself I couldn't agree with you more. I've heard Stupak was not held in the highest of esteem by other troopers. I still wish we knew the story behind his duty incurred disability and if he's still pulling benefits. If the disability has a questionable background that might explain his current sleezy behavior

---

by: cueball @ Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 19:56:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Stupak failed? (0.00 / 0)

Sounds like Stupak's crusade failed.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonath...

Why is he off whining to the "National Review"?

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 03:00:30 AM UTC

Why indeed! (0.00 / 0)

Sounds like Old Bart just needs a hug.

---

by: Nazgul35 @ Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 03:31:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's worth it to me to primary Stupak for throwing women under the bus... (0.00 / 0)

since he is actually violating Dem party platform values, and he is a misogynist of the first order, following "The Family" rules. However, I do hope that whatever "Health Insurance Profitability Act" that is being considered in each house, gets killed, so his No vote is actually a good thing. Kucinich is standing up for all American citizens who need HEALTH CARE, not health INSURANCE. Mandates without regulation is fascism, giving the collective income of citizens to state-sanctioned private corporations.  Anyone who believes "they'll fix it later" should look at NAFTA, the privacy act, TARP, and on and on, to see that our representatives are just selling us a bill of goods. Social Security was up and running in a year.  Why can't we have medicare for all in the same time frame?  Because Congress doesn't want us to have it, they are corrupt.  And Obama lied to us during the Pres race, now he is showing his true colors, making back-room deals with Pharma and AHIP, all to increasing $$$ in the Dem party coffers.  Follow the money.

---

by: sisterkenney @ Sat Mar 13, 2010 at 15:26:05 PM UTC

Obama's position (0.00 / 0)

Obama didn't run on implementing a single payer system.  

---

by: NoviDemocrat @ Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 03:24:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I want to know more about Saltonstall. (0.00 / 0)

I don't want to back her and then find out she's against the EFCA or something.

---

by: djtyg @ Mon Mar 15, 2010 at 12:51:41 PM UTC