Argue With My Dad

It is time, once again, for another edition of the AWMD Friday Free For All.  This is the only time ofthe week when our arguewithmydad.com readers can control the topic(s) for discussion.  All you have to do is get someone else to respond to your suggested topic and then the floor is yours.  Don’t be shy and don’t hesitate.  Get busy and be sure to get your views and arguments where everyone can read and react to them.  Right here on arguewithmydad.com.  I will make a suggestion or two for possible topics, but they are only suggestions.  Today is Friday so you can be the decider, but you need to tell us what you want to discuss.  So, what will it be?

My first suggested topic concerns the news that broke today that a Federal Judge had ordered the Justice Department to release Gitmo detainee Mohammed Jawad who has been illegally imprisoned and tortured for almost 7 years.  http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/40544prs20090730.html.  This is an amazing turn in a long overdue case.   United States District Judge Ellen Huvelle gave the government a deadline of August 21st to release Jawad to the Afghan government.  One of the ACLU attorneys sums up the judges order perfectly. “The following can be attributed to Jonathan Hafetz, staff attorney with the ACLU National Security Project and one of Jawad’s lawyers in his habeas corpus case:  “Judge Huvelle made clear that Mr. Jawad has been illegally detained and the government has no credible evidence to continue holding him. We are pleased that the Justice Department has expressed a commitment to getting him home so that this nightmare of abuse and injustice can finally come to an end.”  Here is a link to the judge’s order: http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/40543lgl20090730.html.  I am anxious to see how the Obama Justice Administration honors this order because they had been arguing that the Justice Department was considering separate criminal charges against Jawad that would be based on alleged “new” evidence and not based on information gained through torture techniques.  This is finally the end of a sad story for this individual who has endured being held illegally for almost 7 years and who had to suffer through multiple torture episodes.  Our country cannot stand for torture and cannot allow it to be used against any of the detainees in our custody or in the custody of our torture partners.  What do you think of this important case?  Let’s hear from you.

My second suggested topic is the story that I saw in the New York Times today about Ireland agreeing to accept two detainees from Gitmo. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/world/europe/30gitmo.html?_r=1.  Leave it to the country of my ancestors to jump in and volunteer to assist the United States in closing the hell hole known as Gitmo. The amazing part of this story is that Ireland is a neutral country and the Irish citizens that I spoke to during my trip to Ireland just after we invaded Iraq were 100% against our attack on Iraq.  But yet their country is stepping up to the plate to help the United States and the Obama administration right a serious wrong.  Kudos to Ireland and its government for making this decision.  What do you think about this gesture by the Irish? 

I have made my suggestions, and they are just that, suggestions.  Let’s hear what you want to talk about.  I will be anxiously waiting to see what You want to talk about.  Please note that I will be out of town from today, July 31st until Tuesday, August 4th, but I will be checking in to see what topics are being discussed.  It is time to get busy and let everyone know what you are thinking about.  Let’s hear from all of you!

Another weekend has flown by, but if it is Monday, then it must be time for another chapter of our regular MONDAY MUSINGS.  It has been a busy weekend with my grandson here for a wonderful visit and there were lots of news stories to digest, and one story really caught my interest.  Recently Texas Tech University took the bold step in hiring our old friend, Alberto Gonzalez as an instructor.  “Gonzales will teach a junior-level seminar class, “Contemporary Issues in the Executive Branch,” for the department and recruit minority and underrepresented students, Hance announced earlier this month.” http://lubbockonline.com/stories/072509/loc_470732313.shtml  & http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/politics/entries/2009/07/07/alberto_gonzales_set_to_teach.html.  Hance is the Chancellor of Texas Tech and he was involved in the hiring of Gonzalez for the political science department.  Of course, the Texas Tech faculty is now circulating a petition asking for Gonzalez to be removed from the faculty.  According to the Lubbock Avalanche-Journal online article, Gonzalez plans on some interesting courses for his lucky students.  The one course is titled, “Contemporary issues in the Executive Branch”. What “issues” will that course examine, you ask?  “He said he would talk about some of the accomplishments of a Gonzales-led Department of Justice.”We kept the country safe … since 9-11 we have not had another attack,” he said, listing crimes against children, drugs, guns and gangs, public corruption and civil rights as issues tackled while he was attorney general.” http://lubbockonline.com/stories/072409/loc_468827807.shtml.  How many times are we going to hear and put up with the tired, Bush regime talking point that we were safe after 9-11-2001?  These guys still don’t get it that they were in control on 9-11 and they are responsible for the attack and the aftermath of the attack.  We all have read the stories about Bush ignoring the many warnings about Al-Qaeda attacks prior to 9-11 and yet Gonzo is still handing out this pile of crap.  No wonder the faculty is upset with his hiring.  The university is paying Gonzo $100,000 for his expertise in these Political Science issues.  Some of the protesting faculty members question his teaching ability and experience.  Since he has never taught before, it is a reasonable question on their part.

The bottom line here is that a friend of Gonzo, who just happens to be the Chancellor of Texas Tech is the man behind the hiring.  I will take a wild guess that George W. Bush is also a friend of this Chancellor.  Needless to say, this hire is a controversial one.  Especially in light of how Gonzalez left his position as the Attorney General.  Has anyone who has screwed up so much and possibly perjured himself in his testimony to Congress, received such a sweetheart deal?  Gonzo did state in the above linked article that he will admit his mistakes and learn from those mistakes and ” learn and move forward on behalf of the American  people. ” http://lubbockonline.com/stories/072409/loc_468827807.shtml.  I guess Gonzo must think that the entire country will be following and learning from his little seminar at Texas Tech.  Luckily for the country, Gonzo is no longer the Attorney General and his old boss, George W. Bush is no longer in office.  Maybe we will hear from Gonzo again and it won’t be from sitting in on one of his lectures at Texas Tech.  If the current Attorney General honors his oath of office, Gonzo just may be answering question to a special prosecutor.  Now that would be a lesson that the country would love to learn.

It is time, once again, for another edition of the AWMD Friday Free For All.  This is the only time of the week when our arguewithmydad.com readers can control the topic(s) for discussion.  All you have to do is get someone else to respond to your suggested topic and then the floor is yours.  Don’t be shy and don’t hesitate.  Get busy and be sure to get your views and arguments where everyone can read and react to them.  Right here on arguewithmydad.com.  I will make a couple of suggestions for possible topics, but they are only suggestions.  Today is Friday so you can be the decider, but you need to tell us what you want to discuss.  So, what will it be?

The first suggested topic is the continuing outlandish claim that President Obama is not a citizen and cannot legally hold the office of President.  These claims by the so-called Birthers, have been proven false many times, but the radical right wing just can’t get used to having to live with facts.  The latest example is the claim by an old Right Wing extremist from the Richard Nixon era.  The one and only, G. Gordon Liddy is again making false claims on the citizenship status of President Obama. This Think Progress article discusses the latest wild ass claim made by former Watergate criminal, G. Gordon Liddy.http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/23/gordan-liddy-birther/.  On Chris Mathew’s show, G. Gordon Liddy states that Obama was born in a hospital in Mumbasa, Kenya.  We learn in the Think Progress article that Liddy claims that Obama’s Step Grandmother told someone else that she witnessed the alleged birth in Mumbasa.  Of course, this claim has been debunked before.  Here is a link to a Salon.com article that explains the errors in Liddy’s claims, http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/07/23/liddy/index.html?source=rss&aim=/politics/war_room.  Take a look at these links and let us know what do you think about these far-fetched claims by Liddy and his Birther comrades.

The next suggested topic that we could discuss is the story that I saw recently about an Ohio state representative who is reintroducing a bill to make it illegal for a woman to have an abortion without the approval of the biological father. http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/22/ohio-bill-men-final-say-abortion/.  Rep. John Adams, a Republican state representative  “… wants to change that and the legislation he introduced today, House Bill 252, would require the biological father’s consent before an abortion can be done.The bill would apply to any abortion and would require written consent before it can be done.Adams told the Daily Reporter newspaper that abortion centers would “need to get consent from the biological father” before the abortion can proceed and he called the measure a “father’s right bill” to protect the interest of fathers who are given no say in the abortion process.” http://www.lifenews.com/state4302.html.  I would love to hear from all of the female members of the AWMD nation so we can hear what women think of this patently unconstitutional legislation.  Let’s hear from the guys as well.  This is an example of how repressive the Republicans and the Right to Lifer’s can get with a woman’s body.  What do you think?

Now that I have provided two possible topics of discussion it is your turn to let us know what you want to discuss.  Remember, this is the day for you to control our discussions.  It is the time to let us know what topic you have been dying to tell someone about.  Do not delay and do not hesitate.  Don’t be shy, we won’t bite.  Get busy and get writing and tell us what is your hot topic of choice. 

Another weekend has flown by, but if it is Monday, then it must be time for another chapter of our regular MONDAY MUSINGS.  It has been a busy weekend with lots of news stories to digest, but one story really caught my interest.  It seems that the CIA had some serious disagreements over the use of torture techniques against detainees at secret prisons with the FBI agents who first interrogated Abu Zubaida after he was captured in Pakistan. After the CIA team led by two psychologists, James Mitchell and Bruce Jensen, began to use torture on Abu Zubaida, the FBI interrogators balked and complained that Abu Zubaida had already given them good information without using illegal tactics.     http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/18/AR2009071802065.html?hpid=topnews.  What importance does this new set of facts have in the whole CIA torture story?  I think it is important because one of the FBI agents recently testified at a Congressional hearing and made the claim that the only good information that was received was obtained through conventional interrogation techniques and this story quotes other sources that confirm the FBI agent’s testimony.  One item that jumped out at me when reading this article was the multiple references by the CIA agents that their techniques were approved by the White House.  Of course, the CIA refers to the White House as “downtown”, according to this same Washington Post article. 

We learn from this article that the FBI were the good guys and the CIA were the bad guys when it came to interrogating Abu Zubaida.  Of course, we also learn something most of us already knew.  That the White House approved the torture techniques on this first big detainee.  I sure hope that the current White House has read this article.  Maybe now President Obama will understand why the Bush regime must be investigated over its illegal use of torture in interrogating detainees.  Maybe the good news here is that Congress is already investigating these torture techniques and will probably beat Obama to the punch. My hope is that the Congressional torture  investigation will provide the politcal cover for Attorney General Holder to approve a special prosecutor with broad authority to take the investigation wherever the facts may lead.  This FBI agents testimony is not only evidence that torture is ineffective, it also proves that the FBI and the CIA were in a pitched battle over the use of these techniques. We had heard some of this information in earlier stories, but this is the first time agents have gone public on this issue. 

The stain of torture is on the Bush administration and those officials who designed and approved it.  If the Obama administration does not investigate and prosecute those responsible, they will also carry that stain.  This FBI agent was not only brave in taking a stand against the CIA’s torture program, he was also right.  Keep an eye on this congressional investigation and let’s see if Holder and Obama have as much courage as FBI agent Ali Soufan did when he balked when the CIA used torture and when he went public to tell what the CIA had done.  Kudos to Agent Soufan.

It is time, once again, for another edition of the AWMD Friday Free For All.  This is the only time of the week when our arguewithmydad.com readers can control the topic(s) for discussion.  All you have to do is get someone else to respond to your suggested topic and then the floor is yours.  Don’t be shy and don’t hesitate.  Get busy and be sure to get your views and arguments where everyone can read and react to them.  Right here on arguewithmydad.com.  I will make a couple of suggestions for possible topics, but they are only suggestions.  Today, you can be the decider, but you need to tell us what you want to discuss.  So what do you want to talk about?

The first suggested topic that I have is a story that I just saw earlier today.  It seems that our friends in Texas are up to their old tricks when it comes to pushing religion into the public school curriculum.   According to The Dallas Morning News, Conservative leaders are trying to push Civil Rights leaders out of Texas textbooks and replace them with more information on how religion has impacted life in the United States. “The recommendations are part of a long process as the State Board of Education prepares to write new social studies curriculum standards for public schools. Debate on the issue, which will also include questions of the role of religion in public life, could be as intense as that on new science standards that were adopted by the board in March, when evolution was a major flashpoint.”  http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/education/stories/DN-socialstudies_09tex.ART0.State.Edition1.4bfaaf7.html  & http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/16/conservative-texas-jesus-lincoln/.  This attempt by conservatives to force religion into the public school curriculum is dangerous for all of us because many of the companies that produce books for Texas, use those same books throughout the country.  One of these so-called experts suggested that Republican values need to be added to the curriculum because the U.S. is a republic!  These are the intellectuals that are designing our social studies books that our kids will be reading for the next 5-10 years.  Do you think Religion belongs in the public school curriculum?  If you do, let us know why you think that is a good idea. 

The next suggested topic that I have concerns today’s op ed in the Wall Street Journal by former OLC attorney, John Yoo. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124770304290648701.html.  It seems that Professor Yoo still thinks that he can rewrite history and lie about what FISA allows or doesn’t allow.  Mr.Yoo tries to spank the Inspector General’s report that recently took exception to his sloppy and unprofessional legal memos during the Bush regime.  According to Scott Horton, a contributing editor with Harper’s, Yoo is playing loose with the facts.  “Holding up Yoo’s legal opinion of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, Shuster asked,’ “Is this dishonesty, incompetence or something else going on here?” ‘  “It’s total dishonesty. He knows very well the FISA statute doesn’t require a warrant in the sense of a criminal probe, which is probable cause. The only thing that’s required is that the government has to show relevance that there actually is reason; a national security concern that motivates the request for surveillance. [...] It gives much more flexibility than Yoo suggests in his op-ed piece. ” http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/07/17/shuster-slams-yoo-for-dishonesty-incompetence/.  Take a look at what Mr. Yoo writes and then compare it to what Scott Horton tells us in the Raw Story article.  Let’s not forget that Mr. Yoo declined to be interviewed for the Inspector General’s report that he is complaining about.  I think maybe it is time for Attorney General Holder to have Mr. Yoo sworn in under oath to discuss his faulty and dishonest legal memos and how they approved of illegal torture and the violation of FISA.  What is your opinion about Mr. Yoo and his legal work?  Let us know if you think he should be talking to a grand jury or a special prosecutor. 

I have given you two possible topics to discuss, but now it is your turn to let us know what you want to talk about.  I can’t make you join in the discussion, but if you try it, you just might enjoy it.  So get going and give us your opinion and give us a topic that you want to discuss.  I and the rest of the arguewithmydad.com nation will be waiting to hear what you want to talk about.

The next

After more than 6 and one half years in captivity in Afghanistan and at Gitmo, Mohammed Jawad may finally be getting some justice.  Earlier today the ACLU announced a big change in the Government’s legal approach to Jawad’s military commission case. “The government today stated it would no longer rely on evidence obtained through torture and other coercion in the habeas corpus case challenging the unlawful detention of Guantánamo detainee Mohammed Jawad. The American Civil Liberties Union filed a motion on July 1 to suppress Jawad’s statements, and today the Justice Department announced it would not oppose that motion. “  http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/40319prs20090715.html.  This individual has been imprisoned and tortured even though he was only 12 years old when he was turned over to the Americans in Afghanistan for allegedly throwing a grenade at U.S. personnel. This habeas case earlier received a big boost when the former military prosecutor in the case, Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld, actually filed a petition in favor of Mr. Jawad and stated that ““no credible evidence or legal basis” to justify Jawad’s detention and prosecution, and that his release present no risk. ” http://www.aclu.org/safefree/detention/38714res20090113.html.  I didn’t make this up!  The former lead prosecutor of Mr. Jawad is actually on the record stating that the government has no legal basis to hold him.  He actually resigned his position as prosecutor because he did not believe that Mr. Jawad could ever receive real justice under the military commission system.  This abhorrent and illegal activity was being carried out by our government in our name. 

I can only hope that this latest approach by the Obama Justice Department is a signal that they will agree to no longer rely on evidence obtained through torture on all of the Gitmo habeas cases.  This teenager/detainee actually has attempted suicide after having to suffer through 6 plus years of detention and many torture episodes.   The ACLU has been doing yeoman work on the Jawad case and our thanks go out to them.  Without their work and the work of the other volunteer attorneys and their staff, there would not be any chance of real justice at Gitmo.  Now that the Obama Justice Department has seen the light and realized that they cannot, and should not, use tainted evidence that was derived through the use of illegal torture, maybe the lives of the detainees there will have a chance of some sanity.   Stay tuned.

Is it Monday already?  After fighting a summer cold all weekend, I kind of lost track of time.  If it is Monday, then it must be time for another chapter of our regular MONDAY MUSINGS.  It has been a busy weekend with lots of news stories to digest, but one story really caught my interest.  That story is the one that I have been waiting awhile to hear. It seems that Attorney General Eric Holder is considering investigating the Bush Administration and its torture policies. http://www.newsweek.com/id/206300.  Although the news is just based on unnamed sources at this point, if it is true, it could blow the lid off of Washington.  The Newsweek story is just one of the media sources that have been reporting the news of the purported investigation by Holder.  Actually, the news sources are reporting that Holder is thinking of naming a special prosecutor to investigate the Bush torture crowd.

One blog, Emptywheel of FireDogLake.com, labels Holder’s decision as a battle between Holder and Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel due to the friction noted in the aforementioned Newsweek article. http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/07/11/holder-v-rahm-the-torture-fight/.  The important issue for me is not whether Holder has to fight off other Obama administration officials, but whether Holder pulls the trigger on an investigation and how broad of a mandate he gives to the prosecutor.  Without an investigation with a  broad mandate and with no restrictions and no exempt officials, the proposed investigation would be nothing but a whitewash.  While I am optimistic that Holder will honor his oath of office, I will still wait to see the proof.  The Bush Administration officials have bet the farm that Obama and Holder will not do the right thing.  It is time for someone in Washington to do the right thing and Holder is in a position to make History.    The decision  of investigating a prior President and Vice President and their officials is not one that should be taken lightly.  However, when the law has been broken, the law should be blind and the facts should make the decision for the prosecutor. 

This story is even more important in light of the recent allegations that the former Vice President, Dick Cheney ordered the CIA to withold briefings on the Bush Interrogation program since 2001.  When this news hit the wires, I knew that Holder now had political cover for ordering the investigation into the torture program because the Bushites are now vulnerable on more than one legal front.  Now, if only Attorney General Holder is reading arguewithmydad.com, he will learn that the progressive world is standing right next to him and will provide him with the support he needs when he blows the whistle on 8 years of lawbreaking.  As we heard during the demonstrations at the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, “The whole world is watching”.

 It is time, once again, for another edition of the AWMD Friday Free For All.  This is the only time of the week when our arguewithmydad.com readers can control the topic(s) for discussion.  All you have to do is get someone else to respond to your suggested topic and then the floor is yours.  Don’t be shy and don’t hesitate.  Get busy and be sure to get your views and arguments where everyone can read and react to them.  Right here on arguewithmydad.com.  I will make a couple of suggestions for possible topics, but they are only suggestions.  Today, you can be the decider, but you need to tell us what you want to discuss.

The first suggested topic that I have concerns the amazing news this week from Leon Panetta, the Director of the CIA, that admitted that the CIA has repeatedly lied to Congress since 2001. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/08/house-%20democrats-cia-director-testified-that-agency-misled-congress/.  This news just shook me to the core and I have been amazed how little play it has gotten in the major media outlets.  We have the Director of the CIA admitting that his agents have lied to the U.S. Congress in its classified briefings for almost 8 years and there have been no calls for investigations by the the usual Liberal, progressive sources. Even though Panetta hasn’t retracted his claims that Speaker Pelosi was fully briefed on the torture used in its interrogations of detainees, one has to wonder if he is telling the truth now that he has admitted that his folks have been lying for years.  This is especially interesting in light of the fact that the Obama Administration is warning of a presidential veto of a proposed new bill that would enlarge the number of Senators and U.S. Representatives who would be briefed on covert activities. “In a related development, President Obama threatened to veto the pending Intelligence Authorization Bill if it included a provision that would allow information about covert actions to be given to the entire House and Senate Intelligence Committees, rather than the so-called Gang of Eight — the Democratic and Republican leaders of both houses of Congress and the two Intelligence Committees.” http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/09/us/politics/09intel.html?_r=1&hp.  I know I am slow, but I don’t get it.  If the CIA has just admitted to lying to Congress, why wouldn’t President Obama want more Congressional oversight of these lying sacks of human excrement?  Why do you think the CIA was lying and who ordered it and why doesn’t Obama want more oversight?  Let us know what you think.

My second suggested topic of discussion is the lawsuit that the State of Massachusetts filed against the U. S. Government, challenging the Federal Defense of Marriage Act that defines marriage as a union between a man a woman only. http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/massachusetts-challenge-constitutiona &  http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/mass_to_challen.html.   Massachusetts claims that the Feds overstepped their bounds by telling the States who they could approve to get married.  I have been against the Defense of Marriage Act from day one and now that several states have legalized same sex marriages, the battle lines are drawn.  The state argues that the DOMA illegally prevents legally married couples in Massachusetts from taking advantage of benefits and protections that other married couples are legally entitled to.  “The suit alleges that the law violates the 10th Amendment to the Constitution, which reserves to the states all powers except those granted to the federal government. It also alleges that the law violates Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution, which limits the power of Congress to attach conditions to the receipt of federal funds.” http://www.boston.com/news/local/breaking_news/2009/07/mass_to_challen.html.  What do you think of he DOMA and what do you think of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ action to challenge this Federal act?  I see this as a Civil Rights issue and taking away any person’s right to marry whomever they wish is unconstitutional.  Let’s hear your take on this important issue!

I have given you two possible topics to discuss, but now it is your turn to let us know what you want to talk about.  I can’t make you join in the discussion, but if you try it, you just might enjoy it.  So get going and give us your opinion and give us a topic that you want to discuss.  I and the rest of the arguewithmydad.com nation will be waiting.

After discussing yesterday that Sen. Baucus’ committee was considering removing abortion coverage from their proposed health care reform bill, Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid made it very clear that Baucus should stop trying to give away the farm for a few Republican votes.  According to Roll Call, http://www.rollcall.com/issues/55_3/news/36562-1.html, Reid told Baucus that they would lose 10-15 Democratic votes if he allowed the Republicans to remove the abortion coverage from the upcoming health care reform bill.  I have been one of Sen. Reid’s toughest critics so I have to take the time here to give him his due.  What Baucus was doing was trying to get a few Republicans to cooperate for a change and actually vote for a Democratic proposal.  It sounds good if you are not caving in to the Religious Right Wing in the process.  The Roll Call article linked above also informs us that the Dems are also not happy with Baucus’ idea to tax health care benefits in order to help pay for the health care reform.  Once again, if the Democrats in the Senate follow through on what Reid started here, this legislation may be the most important individual piece of legislation in a generation.  This strong stance by Reid is even more important after we heard the mixed signals from the White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel as to Obama’s support of a public option.

The Democrats do not need the Republicans if they do not want to give the American public what they want.  What the public wants is a true public option that guarantees coverage for all and guarantees that Women won’t be left behind without abortion coverage.  Kudos Senator Reid, but don’t stop now.  Keep the heat on the Republicans and keep the lobbyists out of the mix and the American Public will be the winners.  The Republicans will lie, cheat and steal to try to stop the public option as this Think Progress article proves http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/06/11/rove-public-plan/, when Think Progress debunked the public option lies being spread by our old “Friend” Karl Rove.  It is time to cover all Americans.  Don’t delay and don’t sell out the public option or coverage for women.   Now, that wasn’t too tough, was it?

Is it Monday already?  If it is, then it must be time for another chapter of our regular MONDAY MUSINGS.  It has been a busy weekend with lots of news stories to digest, but one story really caught my interest.  The important story that I want to discuss concerns the comments made by Democratic Senator on CBS’ Face the Nation program yesterday.  According to the story in the Hill, Schumer stated “ The healthcare reform bill that emerges from Congress this year will include a government-run public health insurance option, regardless of the bipartisan negotiations seeking a compromise in the Senate, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday.
‘ “Make no mistake about it, the president is for this strongly. There will be a public option in the final bill,” Schumer said on CBS News’s “Face the Nation.” ‘
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/schumer-promises-public-option-in-healthcare-bill-2009-07-05.html.  If Schumer is correct, that is very good news and should help soothe the anxiety over the Republican and industry attempts to defeat the Public Option.  The Republicans have called a public option a “deal breaker”.  Of course, my first question is why are we concerned with what the Republicans want in this bill?  When did the Republicans cooperate with the Democrats in the 12 years that they had control of Congress?  The answer is a big Never!  I do not believe that the Republicans have any concern about the Health Care crisis that we have in this country.  They are only concerned with their corporate contributors who are paying lobbyists millions to defeat the public option.  ” ……. a record-breaking influence campaign by the health-care industry, which is spending more than $1.4 million a day on lobbying in the current fight, according to disclosure records. And even in a city where lobbying is a part of life, the scale of the effort has drawn attention. For example, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) doubled its spending to nearly $7 million in the first quarter of 2009, followed by Pfizer, with more than $6 million. ” http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/05/AR2009070502770.html?wprss=rss_politics.  Those are amazing numbers!  Over $1.4 million dollars Per Day are being spent to lobby against the idea that all Americans deserve affordable health care.  With that kind of intense lobbying against them, the Democrats should concern themselves with keeping their own members in line and tell the Republicans that if you want a public option, we welcome your support.  If the Republicans don’t want a public option, we do not need their support.  If these “Republicants” don’t want what is best for America, let them vote against the bill that has a true public option in it.  Then let them tell their constituents why they voted against affordable health care for all!  One more reason to keep the Republicans out of the mix is that they will try to amend it to prevent abortions from being available to all women who need them.  According to this Think Progress article, http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/07/06/abortion-sfc/, the Senate committee responsible for producing a health care bill is actually considering refusing abortion coverage in order to garner more Republican support.  “From Raising Women’s Voices:The Senate Finance Committee has been writing a health care reform bill and struggling to create legislation that will have bipartisan support. Chairman Max Baucus considered several compromises to win Republican support, so they can claim it is bipartisan legislation. One of these potential compromises comes in the form of an abortion exclusion, which would prevent abortion services from being covered by some or all insurance plans in the Health Insurance Exchange.  We fear that members of the Senate Finance Committee are considering such a compromise.”  

This kind of so-called compromise would be a sell-out to the Radical Religious Right and harm women across the country.  Without the same coverage that the vast majority of health care plans now provide to women, the bill would not be acceptable.   Let’s make sure that your Representative and your Senators know that you demand a true public option that includes NO compromises that take away coverage.  This bill could be the most important piece of legislation for Obama’s presidency.  Get busy and call your Congressperson and your Senators and let them know what the Majority wants and needs.  Our health depends on it!