BREAKING: Health Care Reform Passes U.S. House 220-215

Great! Bring on the Senate now. Reform is coming. One way or another.

Cheers to Nancy Pelosi too for being the country's greatest and best looking Speaker of the House ever. Please watch now as the dark side (the republicans aka the moneychangers) starts to do its thing of trying to make good bad, right wrong, pretty ugly, ethical unethical, normal abnormal, love hate, light darkness, moral immoral, charity socialism, consideration welfare, progress regress, faith doom, hope suicide, et al. My brothers and sisters I urge you not to fret or give up, that's the purpose republicans serve. It's what they do and why they exist at this point and time.

What I expect a lot of as well is the female republican commentators dressed up to hide their wolf tails and minority commentators formerly totally overlooked or ignored finally given a chance to so call shine and work their magic under the big tent of the grand ole party. If you watch them close enough you will see their wolf tails sprout up or out too.

Don't get me wrong now, the usual GOP leaders will come out like gang busters too faking all kinds of outrage and going to yet before lenghts to scare unstable individuals and republicans who already hate Obama and Democrats.

Thank God Bennie Thompson is carrying a pair. He need 2 more pairs to balance those so called fellow Democrats from Mississippi out. Taylor and that other dude ain't blue, they're just elephant-like. One day they will have to pay up, as no man can serve 2 masters. You will love one and hate the other. They've shown us who they love. They got Simpson County on their minds.

Walt- Come on, I thought you had better taste than that, Pelosi is ugly enough to make train take dirt road to keep from hitting her.

what I love about this thing is the debate. But here we sit with 17.5 per cent unemployment and what's up in Washington....party hardy partisians. I hope both sides get the boot in 2010......they all deserve it.

Bubba, that's in remarkably bad taste, even for you.

Right. This isn't that kind of site, Bubba. Go elsewhere to criticize a strong woman leader by talking about her looks. Your sexism isn't welcome here, no more than racism and other -isms.

Since when is it sexism to find a person unattractive?

Re. to Bubba's: "Pelosi is ugly enough to make train take dirt road to keep from hitting her."

You clearly have no good response to the issue, so you attack Pelosi. Your words are, therefore, extremely transparent, as well as sexist, demeaning to Pelosi, to me, and to all women. And, ironically, your words are demeaning to you, the writer, also, for such trashy, empty, mindlessness is beneath you.

Bubba, this is not the 40's or 50's or 60's. I know, because I was alive back then and lived among men who got away with talking and living such crap, then. Too many of us have worked too hard too long to sweep the floor of such garbage. And we don't intend for you or anyone to dirty up the place.

You might want to join us in the reality of 2009.

Well said, J.T.

You clearly have no good response to the issue, so you attack Pelosi.

Classic ad hominem attack. And attacks on their physical looks happens to women in the public eye.

The sad thing is that we had several vicious comments posted today criticizing us for calling out Bubba's ad hominem attack on the speaker of the house's looks.

Geesh ya'll sure are a touchy bunch that was neither a comment on the health care bill or an attack on Pelosi.

It was a comment on Walt's tastes in looks. LOL

Lighten up.

Bubba, it doesn't matter why you said what you said. It is crappy and sexist.

J.T. If thinking someone is very unattractive sexist, is thinking they are attractive sexist?

Meh. In terms of looks I'm sure Ann Coulter is sharing the same train track as Pelosi.

I have to chime in here, and agree that the comments are sexist. If you don't get why that is, try reading a frigging book on feminism and join the rest of us in the 21st century. Let's discuss issues and not the bodies or looks of our women leaders, ok? Hot or not, it's not the point. If you think I have no sense of humor, well, you try being in my shoes for 37 years of sexist bullshit and maybe you won't see it as so funny, either!!!

The Senate debate will be interesting. I'm sure that we will get the "public option" and that all of the abortion hypocrisy will be taken away.

I spent many years working with Family Planning. Women who were pregnant and had issues landing them on the side of choice, did not want insurance companies involved. Why, because it then became a public issue because of the paper trail with employers.

It was sad to see those "conservative Dems" and Republicans use this as an opportunity to turn back the clock on Roe vs Wade. These folks are some very strange and dangerous birds. It's all about their being in the back/front pockets of the insurance companies and pharmaceutical industries.

Thanks, justjess, for getting us back on track as far as the topic of this thread. I will be very interested to see how the senate debate unfolds.

Responding to Bubba's "J.T. If thinking someone is very unattractive [is] sexist, is thinking they are attractive sexist?"

First: how you THINK is up to you. I can't be responsible for how you THINK. But, how you blog openly I can respond to.

THINKING and SPEAKING/WRITING are 2 entirely different things. A little thing called boundaries begins to kick in when we write and speak. You crossed a huge one and if I am alive and kickin' and see it and have the energy to press a key on a keyboard, my friend, I will call you out, everytime I read such a thing.

Second: Bubba, my objection to the way you spoke in your blog went to your demeaning a woman who is 3rd in line for the Presidency of the United States by taunting about your THINKING she looks a certain way. She is not in a personal private relationship with you, Bubba.

Get it, Bubba, it's her brains and her guts and her savvy and her communication skills and her leadership for which she was selected. How many men in such leadership do we see being blogged about in terms of how they look?

Me thinks you so detest her political party and her philosophy and you are hard put to formulate a rational statement that defends your position, so you play games as if she is an object. I perceive that approach as ugly and mean and detestable and stupid and crazy and underhanded and akin to Limbaugh's approach to dealing with people and issues: Mindlessly.

Third: Most women I know like to be considered attractive in a private personal situation, as do, I expect, men; neither like to be treated as objects whether the offender is blogging about them being good or bad looking.

That is the point. Women, like men, are human beings, not objects. They each have multi-faceted lives that expand into the same areas. They expect and deserve and will demand being treated as human beings and not objects to be admired or scorned by men who don't think with the part of their body that lies between the ears.

Folks, it is a sign of desperation every single time a man attacks the way a woman looks to try to detract from her message and her strength. Anybody who does that we should feel sorry for—even as we call them out for the morons they're being in public.

J.T. - I have no boundries. I speak/write what I think. Never seen the need to lie about what I think.

You ladies are reading/imagining alot that just isn't there in my comment to Walt. If was just a joke about him saying she was the best looking speaker. That's all.

Donna- I have nothing to be desperate about. Thanks for the personal touch there, moron? How nice of you. :)

Bubba, it's your words up above. If you don't mean what you write, then why write it?

You seem to get more vicious the longer you post here. And the smiley emoticons aren't changing that fact.

I suggest you stick to commenting on the substance of the posts going forward. I"m not going to allow you to derail important conversations about health care as you tried to do here with an insult about a woman's appearance. There are plenty of sites that welcome that garbage. This is not one of them.

Your next post on this thread needs to be about health care. Clear?

At first, I was willing to compromise on the abortion deal, but now I've changed my mind. I don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water, but I don't think I can support reform if a woman will be prevented from receiving a legal medical procedure. What if it were a life-saving abortion or if the woman were raped or a victim of incest? On the same token, will a man be allowed to have a vasectomy?

Golden,
I don't think whether the general public pays for a certain procedure is the same as preventing someone from receiving that procedure. And since we have decided, at least the House of Reps. has, that we are all going to pay for everyone else's health insurance. Shouldn't we also decide how much coverage we should in fact pay for.

Although your point about a man receiving a vasectomy isn't lost on me, they are not the same thing. Has anyone read the 1900 pages of the bill to know what is covered?

Bubba, are you saying you find Tip O'neal, Newt Gingrich, Denny Hastert or any of the other list of men that held the post before Speaker Pelosi more attractive? As a man I must agree with Walt, as much as it pains me to do so, although; Joseph Gurney Cannon is a close second in my never to be humble opinion. ;-)

Golden eagle, I appreciate your view regarding abortion. I have always cringed that anyone other than the woman would have the right to decide the woman's right to such an intimate choice.

However, though I might be off on my perception of health reform as it addresses abortion, I believe what it is saying is not that a woman can or cannot have an abortion. It is simply not including in subsidies for health coverage payment of them.

It is kinda like I got a shingles shot this week. It costs $200. My wellness benefit is suppose to pay for it, but if it doesn't, it doesn't mean I couldn't get the shot. I would simply have to pay for it.

Too, in some piece I read this morning, I was shocked to understand that some women who get abortions prefer not to ask insurance to cover it in order to assure no paper trail on the procedure to protect their privacy. So, in at least some instances, the payment issue would be moot.