A Very Bush-y Squirrel


Think Progress:

BREAKING: Three Bush-Appointed Judges Reinstate Texas’ Anti-Abortion Law

A panel of three Republican judges, all of whom were appointed by President George W. Bush, granted the state of Texas’ request Wednesday night to reinstate a law that will force many of the state’s abortion clinics to close their doors. […] As Judge Lee Yeakel explained in his opinion striking this part of the Texas law, many abortion providers “do not currently have admitting privileges and cannot gain admitting privileges for reasons including lack of a board certification specialty, retirement, impact on their private practice, and residing too geographically remote from the hospitals that are 30 miles from the Whole Women’s Health Services facilities.” For this and related reasons, the effect of the Texas law would be to prevent many clinics from performing abortions altogether.

Judge Owen, the author of Wednesday’s opinion, is among the most staunchly anti-abortion judges in the country. In 2000, when both Judge Owen and future United States Attorney General Alberto Gonzales were justices on the Texas Supreme Court, then-Justice Owen authored a dissenting opinion seeking to make abortions more difficult to obtain in Texas. Gonzales responded to Owen in a separate concurring opinion that labeled Owen’s proposed resolution of the case an “unconscionable act of judicial activism.”

Damn that George W. Bush! He and his ilk just want to control women!

But wait! There’s more!

I left out a couple pieces:

The order, authored by Judge Priscilla Owen, grants a temporary stay of a lower court judge’s decision blocking a provision of Texas law that requires abortion providers to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital in order to perform abortions at clinics.


The other two judges on the panel, Bush appointees Jennifer Walker Elrod and Catharina Haynes are also considered staunchly conservative judges.

So three WOMEN judges overruled a MALE judge and reinstated a provision of the law. I guess that headline wouldn’t fit Think Progress’ preferred narrative.

BTW – I am not taking a position on the new law.

About Myiq2xu - BA, JD, FJB

I was born and raised in a different country - America. I don't know what this place is.
This entry was posted in Abortion and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to A Very Bush-y Squirrel

  1. Interesting. If my gender were allowed an opinion on this subject I probably would say something, but since that ain’t gonna happen I’ll just stick with “interesting”.

  2. If this didn’t get posted earlier it’s worth a read. Spot-on comments. Hee, hee, hee.

  3. The Klown says:
  4. Lulu says:

    I knew the poison pill, bait and switch, big lie would be exposed eventually for Medicaid expansion whatever it might be. The Medicaid enrollees are approximately 10 to 1 for private insurance purchasers through the exchanges. Expanded Medicaid was sold as a win-win to the states as the feds were going to pay for “all” of it. Uh huh, yeah.
    “The federal government foots the entire bill for Medicaid enrollees who are NEWLY eligible under the health law.”
    States do, however, have to help pay for residents who were eligible before the health law but are just signing up. That could be costly: In Washington, for example, about one-third of the new Medicaid sign-ups falls into this category.”

    • The Klown says:

      “The federal government foots the entire bill for Medicaid enrollees who are NEWLY eligible under the health law.”

      IIRC, that is only for the first year. Then it drops to 90% the second year. State or federal, it’s still tax dollars.

      • Lulu says:

        The governors that suckered their states into this should be run out of town. Those governors made claims just like Obama only that it was “free” money for their states or that other states would be paying for it through federal general income tax. Many got a lot of pushback but did it anyway. But NOOOO. It will be state tax payers footing a much larger percentage of the bill than they were led to believe so maybe they deserve it. It makes Medicaid that was already lousy health care access even worse with few providors accepting it. When some of these states realize what they have done, knowingly or not, it will not be good.

        • Somebody says:

          I’m not an expert on Medicaid, but I did have a lot of exposure to Medicaid patients during my daughter’s cancer treatment. Medicaid paid for a lot of things my husband’s “cadillac” “gold plated” government employees health insurance didn’t pay for.

          Along the same lines when there weren’t enough beds available we always, ALWAYS got the boot. I always assumed it was because our insurance probably wasn’t paying as much as Medicaid. I could be wrong because a few times a couple of the doctors said they knew our daughter would get excellent care at home and that we’d be attentive and call if warranted so they felt comfortable sending her home a “little early”. Um OK, sure but we’re not doctors or nurses, although we might as well be I’ve administered IV chemo at home, not kidding at all, but that has to do with clinic not the hospital…..but somehow I doubt Medicaid patients were administering chemo at home. Anyway we’d get the boot because we’re good parents or so the story went, but again I always felt money paid a larger part but I have no proof. The hospital was very overcrowded at the time in fact they just finished a major construction project that doubled it.

          I don’t have any idea on a day to day basis what kind of coverage Medicaid has, but in a catastrophic illness I assure you those patients recieved the exact same care my daughter did and in some cases better because Medicaid didn’t question tests and stuff my insurance questioned. Things could be completely different in different states or even outside of pediatric care, that’s just my little window on the world of Medicaid.

          My other little window on the world showed me in the event of a catastrophic illness it wasn’t the very poor that suffered. It was the middle class family above the income limits of charity typically $50,000 a year. Families below that figure had multiple charities helping them in a variety of ways or they were Medicaid. Families above that income had a LOT of very expensive bills, some had better insurance than others but all of them had a lot of bills…..co-pays, co-insurance, prescriptions, etc. There were several families I knew on the threshold where one parent or both quit work in order to get assistance so they didn’t go bankrupt and lose everything they had. Also, several got “divorced” for the same reason. How screwed up is that???

        • Somebody says:

          Ack….need more caffeine…..second paragraph, next to last line….I thought money PLAYED a larger part not paid…..Freudian slip I suppose.

  5. Lulu says:

    I thought the press had declared Terry Mc 4000% ahead of Cuccinelli in Virgina. Only moonshiners and snake handlers were going to vote for the Italian guy. What happened? Were the usual propagandists spewing drivel until the polls started coming in? Or are voters remembering Cuccinelli was one of the primary state attorney generals who took on Obamacare? At least he tried while Terry Mc was investing in dead people (his voter base).

    • DeniseVB says:

      Yes, that pesky challenge to Obamacare’s constitutionality and states rights, blah, blah, blah. (CUCCINELLI WANTS YOU TO DIE!).

      Then there’s those new Va laws to make abortion safer, clean them up and sterilize the equipment, bring PP clinics up to building codes, blah, blah, blah. (CUCCINELLI HATES WOMENZ). Several clinics had to close because it was just not affordable (CUCCINELLI REALLY HATES WOMEN, COAT HANGERS AND STUFF!!).

      Oh, and another thing, one of McAuliffe’s biggest donors? Planned Parenthood, over a million dollars. Boy that could’ve helped those po’ clinics, huh?

      McA’s never held an elected office, finished almost last in the last governor’s primary (so they changed the rules, now the Va.Dems can just pick their candidate-this year, MCAULIFFE !). The Clintons and Obamas have headlined his rallies. Something’s up.

      Had McA put his “company” in Franklin, Va a few years ago, I may have looked at him differently, but no, he chose a Mississippi location.

      • Lulu says:

        Terry Mc is a skeezy apparatchik. And something is definitely up. The media declaring elections a month ahead of time is not working anymore. And speaking of abortion clinics, 3 in a huge state (Texas) had to close as a result of the big bruhaha (suck it Wendy) over improving standards to bring them up to par with colonoscopy mills.

        • DeniseVB says:

          Here, it was bringing clinics up the safety codes of nail salons 😉 Our local paper endorsed McAuliffe in September, odd, it’s usually the Sunday before election day we get that kind of news. The VaPilot is the WaPo of SE Va.

    • indigogrrl1 says:

      McAuliffe may win…. but more voters will vote against him then for him. Cuccinelli is polling in the forties and the Libertarian candidate Sarvis is also polling double digits … 10% acc to the news this morning.

    • Mt.Laurel says:

      I only work in Virginia but I was dumbfounded when they went with old craptastic Terry Mac.

      People know I worked here and ask me what I think and I have been semi jokingly saying it is time to break the vowel barrier in the Old Dominion.

      On topic: Regardless of whether one is prolife/prochoice/proabortion, I have always been amazed that abortion clinics in many states are treated as if they are just some random business and not health care facilities providing invasive care/surgical procedures.

  6. The Klown says:
    • Lulu says:

      They will not leave the poor chicken alone.

    • OMG! The pic of the dental “clinic”! OMG! NOT where I would want my children or grandchildren to receive ANY kind of medical care. In a friggin stadium? NO barriers preventing transfer of microbes from one patient to the next?
      What the fuck? Talk about third world.

Comments are closed.