Gibbs: Obama not taking sides in Stupak amendment debate

[joeycola]

so, we now have the WH fence sitting on this issue!!


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/67001-gibbs-obama-not-taking-sides-in-stupak-amendment-debate

Gibbs: Obama not taking sides in Stupak amendment debate

By Tony Romm - 11/09/09 02:38 PM ET

The White House on Monday signaled it would keep its distance in the increasingly vocal debate over whether health insurance reform should include language related to abortion.

When asked whether the president supported Rep. Bart Stupak's (D-Mich.) amendment to prohibit the public insurance plan from covering abortion services, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs dodged the question -- multiple times.

"Well, ask me that right before Christmas and the end of the New Year," Gibbs said during today's press briefing, noting the president still expected to sign a healthcare bill before the year's end.
....................

However, a number of liberal-leaning Democrats have since insisted they will not lend their votes to any conference report that contains even a variation of Stupak's efforts -- a position that puts the Democratic leadership in quite a political bind.

"I would expect that we would go over to the White House next week -- and we're going to tell the president the same thing we're telling the speaker," Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus Chair Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) told MSNBC earlier today, reaffirming her opposition to the amendment.

"A large group of us are saying that if this language is contained in the conference report, then we will not vote for the conference report," she added. "So it needs to be stripped out in the conference."

..................

[Captain Hilts]

1. Gee ain't that just swell? nt

[joeycola]

Just jolly..

:sarcasm:

[ClarkUSA]

42. Not half as jolly as the locked OP where you posted an article that was "wistful for Bush" nt

[ClarkUSA]

50. "Co-Chair of House pro-choice caucus "enormously encouraged" by Obama statement on Stupak amendment"

Jolly this, Bitter One:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8747267&mesg_id=8747267

[ClarkUSA]

52. Jolly this, too, Bitter One: "President Obama is against this Abortion Amendment"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8745909&mesg_id=8745909

[vaberella]

2. I'm taking Obama's words, not Gibbs. Thanks. And O spoke out on this already. n/t

[geek tragedy]

4. That's not the point of this thread.

What is the point of this thread?

See this thread for the author's agenda:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8744438

[vaberella]

8. I almost forgot about that thread. He loves hit pieces. Even they're BS. n/t

[geek tragedy]

11. One-trick pony.

Note that Rep. DeGette, quoted in the OP, feels 'enormously enouraged' by the administration's stand on this.

[geek tragedy]

3. Disingenuous, outdated post.

Obama himself made a statement expressing disapproval of the Stupak amendment, noting that it went beyond preserving the status quo and actively restricted women's choice.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/10/health/policy/10health.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss

""I want to make sure that the provision that emerges meets that test -- that we are not in some way sneaking in funding for abortions, but, on the other hand, that we're not restricting women's insurance choices," he said."


But, this is a much better effort than your "we miss Bush" thread yesterday. Not that your agenda is any less obvious.

K&U, as always.

[joeycola]

5. well, gee, So Gibbs is not speaking for the President??

[geek tragedy]

6. Obama speaks for Obama, and he said that the Stupak amendment

is goes too far.

But, then again, he doesn't speak like George W Bush, so I can understand your unhappiness:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8744438

[vaberella]

9. Over the course of O's term. I've come to realize. Obama speaks for himself!

The other's are often wrong, misleading, implying someting else, or don't know what they're talking about and Obama has to correct them.

[Captain Hilts]

12. Then he needs to get the White House's message on point. nt

[high density]

15. So it's up to Obama to go back and update outdated news stories now?

I'm sure he'll get right on that.

[geek tragedy]

22. No, Obama needs to be more like George W Bush

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8744438

[geek tragedy]

16. Gibbs was clearly avoiding comment so that Obama himself

could make the statement.

[Bluenorthwest]

30. Then he did so poorly

Clearly is like this: "I'm going to let the President address that issue himself." See? Clear as a bell, which Gibbs was not. See the difference?

[geek tragedy]

31. Okay, Gibbs mishandled a press conference.

Let's all go throw a poutrage party.

[bluestateguy]

7. He opposes the amendment

But he will sign a bill that includes it if that's what it comes to.

If you don't want the amendment, get on your congressperson's case to get it removed. Don't expect Obama to do everything for you.

[IndianaGreen]

14. 'Don't expect Obama to do everything for you.'

Don't expect us to reward him with our votes in 2012!

[geek tragedy]

17. So, even when he says exactly what the pro-choice

caucus wants him to say, you still bash him.

Why should he care what you say, if you're determined to attack him no matter what?

[joeycola]

18. But Gibbs made a comment--a deceptive comment! According to your "logic" Gibbs

already knew and was just waiting for the Pres to speak up.

[geek tragedy]

19. What was the deceptive comment?

I mean, I know you miss the plainspoken, earnest ways of George W Bush, but most adults can comprehend a little subtlety.

[joeycola]

23. Figure it out.....

.....geek tragedy Tue Nov-10-09 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Gibbs was clearly avoiding comment so that Obama himself

could make the statement.

[geek tragedy]

25. The only deceptive statements

are coming from you.

[dionysus]

39. i don't think he's too worried about the green party juggernaut.

:rofl:

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Zodiak]

51. "Go back to the batman movies and leave politics to the grown folks"

Not a very nice way to get your start on this board.

Also, it is hard to convince someone you are the "grown up" when you are the one hurling insults and jeers, not to mention your grammar and spelling are atrocious.

Care to try again....this time as a respectful member of this community rather than a insult-hurling bomb-thrower?

[PVnRT]

58. I'm sorry; I thought we should expect our LEADERS to LEAD

[geek tragedy]

60. Does it only count if he does it in CAPITAL LETTERS?

Chair of the House pro-Choice caucus is very happy with his comments.

[geek tragedy]

10. Diane DeGette: "I am enormously encouraged " by Obama's statement

on the Stupak amendment:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=400976&mesg_id=400976

[impik]

13. I guess Obama didn't get the memo

[Deep13]

20. Those who won't fight have already lost. nt

[geek tragedy]

21. This is a misleading post--Obama has sided with the pro-choice

caucus in the house on this.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=400976&mesg_id=400976

"REP. DEGETTE: "I just found out about the President's statement about an hour ago, and I'm enormously encouraged, because the President is really saying what the rest of us think. This is a health care bill."

[backscatter712]

26. OLD ARTICLE!!! Obama's since spoken up about this.

Obama's taking the pro-choice side - the correct side.

[Ed76638]

27. Of course not.

Because that would require actual leadership on Obama's part.

[geek tragedy]

28. too bad you didn't bother to learn the FACTS

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8747267&mesg_id=8747267

[vaberella]

29. Thanks for posting this GT. Ugh....so much misinformation and the OP loves spreading it. n/t

[Ed76638]

46. Still

Obama is lacking in the leadership department. Congress must be held by the hand in order for us to receive the change we voted for.

[geek tragedy]

49. Congress is a co-equal branch of government.

It is not the President's role to micromanage it. That's Karl Rove politics.

[Ed76638]

64. That may be the case, but it doesn't reflect reality.

Of course the president can't directly interfere with the workings of congress, but clearly some outside bullying needs to be done.

[geek tragedy]

69. It can only go so far.

Bill Clinton tried the bullying approach. Oops.

[Ed76638]

71. So did Bush.

It worked, and we got absolute utter ass.

With the people actually supporting his agenda, you'd think Obama might just want to try.

[geek tragedy]

75. How did Bush's attempt to privatize social security work out? nt

[Ed76638]

78. Because popular opinion was against that shit.

LOL

[Ed76638]

76. You know what, I'm going to be honest.

Bullying only works on liberals and moderates; not the bought and paid whores.

[dionysus]

32. wow, back for more so soon? i thought you were reminiscing about your hero W.

[geek tragedy]

33. I guess the OP would have preferred if Gibbs

had talked about the sanctity of life and made a Dred Scott reference.

[Beacool]

34. That ain't surprising.

Is this another "present" vote?

Wouldn't want to make waves, wouldn't he.........

:eyes:

[geek tragedy]

36. Not surprising that you would bash him using a tired

old PUMA cliche without learning the facts

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8747267

But, I'm sure you'll correct yourself here, because to be certain, it's about issues and not personal dislike, right?

[NYCGirl]

38. Too bad you didn't read the rest of this thread. You'd find out that Obama has

spoken out about the bill. But then you wouldn't want to know that, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8747267&mesg_id=8747267

[dionysus]

40. now Bea, it's too early in the day to start a kerfluffle!

:hi:

[Beacool]

41. You know me, I like to ruffle the feathers of the fan club.

Hugs to you!!!

:hug:

[Starbucks Anarchist]

47. Why do you care? You didn't even vote for him, according to your own words:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6898276&mesg_id=6898555

[Beacool]

54. That was about the primaries.

:eyes:

[geek tragedy]

59. Apparently it still is. nt

[jefferson_dem]

74. She lost.

Please get over it. Your fixation is not healthy.

Personally, I love them both.

[Beacool]

82. Condescending much?

:eyes:

[uponit7771]

35. Section 236 of Stupak and section 507 are 99% the same!!!

[geek tragedy]

37. Shame on the anti-chioce, Obama hating trolls who recommend

this blatantly deceptive post.

[ClarkUSA]

43. All the usual suspects high-fiving this OP and recced this out-of-date OP are Very Very Bitter. nt

[geek tragedy]

44. clinging too. nt

[Beacool]

55. You forgot about the guns.

:eyes:

[geek tragedy]

57. Well, you did shoot off your mouth here without learning

(or caring) about the facts, so I guess I missed that part.

[Beacool]

63. Well, you are doing a fine job defending him in every post.

No need to add me to the Greek chorus.

:7

[geek tragedy]

65. You sing along with Harriet Christian and Amy Siskind.

So, no, not counting on you to join our side.

[Beacool]

66. I'm not familiar with either woman.

:shrug:

[geek tragedy]

68. O rly? You went out of your way to defend ol Ms. Racist Harriet

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6225703#6225753

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6225703#6226187

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6204870#6217629



http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6289114#6289308

[Beacool]

81. Oh, that woman.

I didn't even remember her name.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

45. Whaaat????

Obama not taking sides??? What a surprise!:sarcasm:

[geek tragedy]

48. You speak from a position of ignorance and/or malice.

Here is the truth:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8747267

[spiritual_gunfighter]

53. I speak from exasperation

at the Obama's administration's ability to speak from both sides of an issue at the same time, further confusing the issue at hand. You speak from a position of defending the administration no matter what as your other 18 posts on this thread is evidence of. A geek tragedy, indeed.

[geek tragedy]

56. Agrees with me: the chair of the house pro-choice caucus.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8747267


Agrees with you: the person who posted this:
"Bloodless President Barack Obama makes Americans wistful for George W Bush"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8744438

Maybe if you could stop gulping the Hatorade, you could think rationally about Obama.

Not gonna hold my breath.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

61. Keep defending all you want

The White House spokesman says one thing and Obama says another, not the first time that has happened either. Defend away. You are up to 19 posts on this thread, your fingers must be tired.

[geek tragedy]

62. I'm proud of what Obama said. There's nothing to defend.

Gibbs dodged the question. He didn't express support for Stupak.

But, people like you will attack him no matter what--not for what he does but for who he is. You don't care what he does--you just look for an excuse to attack.

I just like exposing the haters and distinguishing them from the honest critics such as this person:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8747310


Not everyone can be so honest.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

77. My criticism isn't for Obama coming out against the Stupak amendment

I fully support him if that is his stance on it. My criticism is about Obama saying one thing and his press secretary dodging questions on the same issue and making it appear that Obama wants to stay out of it. It isn't the first time this has happened. I am no hater of Obama just a hater of the mixed signals his administration has repeatly given.

[uponit7771]

79. Obama said he wanted to prevent the status quo from being changed as he last position not his first

...right?

I think the time line is Gibbs said he didn't want in this fight then afterwards said Stupak shouldn't change the status quo.

Stupak changes the procedure on Hyde and makes it permenent law where Hyde has to be voted on every year

[geek tragedy]

80. "Fully support."

:rofl:

Food for thought: Maybe, just maybe, the admin wanted Obama himself to deliver the message instead of Gibbs.

[jefferson_dem]

72. Why continue to spread ignorance when confronted with facts?

Unless...you are happy to disrupt for the sake of disrupting...

[Bonobo]

67. A totally misleading headline from "The Hill"!? No way! nt

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Spazito]

73. A load of crap as usual from this poster...

same old, same old.

[freddie mertz]

83. Even Gibbs was surprised!

I hope this is the beginning of a new, more activist phase for the president on this (and other issues).

Too much has been eft to the congress, who screwed things up royally.