"We’ve heard from people from California to Chicago, all across the country, cheering me on and thanking me for being a voice for women."
-- Rep. Lisa Brown | The Rachel Maddow Show | June 14, 2012
Video at http://bit.ly/MbkddI

Lisa Brown, Rashida Tlaib and Gretchen Whitmer are true progressive leaders, setting examples that more Democrats at all levels should follow. The good news is that all three (and others such as Rebekah Warren and Jocelyn Benson) are at the relative BEGINNING of their careers.

We will hear more from these strong women long after the Republican men who tried to shame, mock and silence them are reduced to political footnotes.

Actually, it's not stupid. It's not a joke. Your rape culture is graphic and an issue; it is inappropriate in society.

No means no, is not a joke Mack. just saying it is, is a problem right there. As a woman I'm affended that a man would believe "NO MEANS NO" is a joke or a refernce to one. No means no means no matter how hot and heavy things might have gotten, you do NOT have permission to have sex with someone. We definately need some laws about penis's. That's for sure. Vagina is the correct name for a woman's body part, what else would you expect someone to call it? A slang word? Vagina has everything to do with that topic Lisa was speaking about.

No means no, is not a joke Mack. just saying it is, is a problem right there. As a woman I'm affended that a man would believe "NO MEANS NO" is a joke or a refernce to one. No means no means no matter how hot and heavy things might have gotten, you do NOT have permission to have sex with someone. We definately need some laws about penis's. That's for sure. Vagina is the correct name for a woman's body part, what else would you expect someone to call it? A slang word? Vagina has everything to do with that topic Lisa was speaking about. Every woman reading your comment no matter what party she belongs to should be offended by your comment and I'm sure any with any self worth are.

I'm pretty sure they did...and reached the conclusion that the pigs only failed because they didn't go far enough.

You are painting all Republican men with a broad brush Glenn. That's like saying all women who dress provocatively are asking for trouble. Both are wrong.

I wonder if she learned that technique from the "pro-life" population?

Maybe we should be asking why Right to Life is WRITING legislation for Michigan? How is it appropriate for any outside organization to be drafting our legislation -- particularly one with a faith-based bias? Last time I checked, the United States of America was not a theocracy. Right to Life believes that terminating pregnancy is not an option even in cases of incest and rape. Let's look at the facts here -- almost 90% of terminations are carried out within the first trimester. Less than 3% are carried out in the third trimester, and these are ONLY in cases where the fetus has very severe health issues, or when the life of the mother is seriously threatened. There is no question that this Bill is attempting to make it more difficult for women to make choices about their reproductive health. 1950s, here we come.

There is nothing wrong with the word vagina, I learned it in anatomy class. However, the comment sounded stupid, and she made the comment to get attention, not because the comment made any sense - which it didnt.

As far as "a woman voluntarily giving up her own life in order to save the life of her own child", every mother I know would do so............without hesitation.

We must travel in very different circles.

This response is for Ann Galen: You could say we travel in different circles. You don't even live in Michigan. You live in Florida.

Thanks, Beth. You can also find a summary of the bill, which passed 70-39, at
http://www.rtl.org/action_center/index.html

Ah, yes, the fig leaf of bipartisanship. That is the true failure of the six Democrats who voted with all but one Republican for HB 5711.

They may have thought that voting "Yes" made no difference in the bill's passage -- 64-45 or 70-39 -- but that doing so might prevent inflaming emotions back in their districts for the upcoming election.

Uunfortunately, their shortsightedness gives the increasingly arrogant Republicans the ability to claim "bipartisan" support for a deeply offensive, poorly-written bill that is a blatant attempt to outlaw what remains a legal medical procedure with nitpicking, regulations and inserting bureaucracy between doctors and patients.

And it won't win any of them a single additional vote in their districts -- Republicans will never accept them no matter how they voted this one time, and Democrats will now be leery of helping them.

Depends on whether your community or school district can avoid imposition of an EM Czar -- which of course depends on whether the Supreme Court will allow the voters to settle the matter, or cast yet another hyper-partisan 4-3 vote to shred precedent, disenfranchise a quarter-million voters (who signed the Repeal PA 4 petitions), and further diminish the Court's legitimacy as objective arbiters of the laws and Constitution of the State of Michigan.

Knollenberg family is apparently out of touch with reality. That's likely why the old man finally got the boot.

John - Maybe tax payers shouldn't pay for anything and the government should just pack up and go away. Based on your logic the tax payers shouldn't pay for anything that you don't want, or that any segment of society doesn't want. Sorry but that isn't going to work so well.

The need for almost all health care is the result of choices.
People don't eat right so they have heart attacks or high blood pressure or high cholesterol should taxes cover that? Should we pay for their choices? People exercise and play sports and get sports injuries. Should taxes pay for that?

Some people think the death penalty is appropriate, some don't. Should our tax money pay for that?

Some people think that war is inappropriate, some don't. Should our tax money pay for that?
Name one thing that you think tax payers money should pay for and there's someone who will disagree with you.

And if morals and the support of life were the key issue here, the same people should be screaming about the death penalty and war and providing food for all starving people etc.

Your arguments aren't making sense to me.

Helen, you said it: "The need for almost all health care is the result of choices". CHOICES! That's what our Constitution guarantees us all: FREEDOM to make choices. If you make a choice that results in healthcare needs, you pay for it. Your poor choices shold not become my responsibility. I agree with you that most of government should pack up and go home. Tax payer money should be used to protect our borders and our country's interests abroad, infrastructure and the like.

Do you know what I find hypocritical? Those who support abortion are the first to cry foul over the death penalty. Did you know that Obama (and probably Lisa Brown based on her staunch support of abortion) support the killing of a baby that survives an abortion? It's referred to as infanticide. A second doctor must come and kill the baby so the first doctor can't be sued over botching the job.

John, you do realize that the Affordable Care Act solves the very problem you are ranting about? Currently if someone has no insurance YOU pay for them to be treated in the Emergency Room. How's that working for you? How about instead we have some legislation that requires everyone to be covered -- it's a radical idea that the Republicans used to support. Remember when they used to have ideas and discussion and reach compromise instead of immediately taking the opposing view to the President?

The Federal government doesn't pay for abortions, and hasn't since 1977.

John - the pro-life people are hypocrites too. Do you hear them talking about stopping the death penalty or stopping war. I don't. So it goes both ways.

I don't think I would ever have an abortion but I've never been in the situation where I would have to make that decision. I think we need to leave these choices up to the mother, the faher if he is in the picture and the doctors. I do not agree with the current legislation being put through the MI House. I am pro Choice.

From what I know the legislation is limiting choice for women and it has nothing to do with the government paying anything. Am I wrong?

John, you have more than alot of nerve and how dare you call any president that won with majority of the vote a dictator! We need alot more laws for penis's and their owners actions with those in this country if we can't get the right to decide what a woman can or can not do with her own body.

Her elbow doesn't give birth, you moron. She is not supporting killing anyone. She is supporting the right to control your own body, without the interference of someone else's religion. Both parents don't give birth. Only the mother. It is her body, and any tissue inside of it is part of HER body. No one else's. No one is asking anyone to pay for their healthcare in this issue, and payments are not part of this legislation. She was asking you to get out of the way. This has nothing to do with democrats. Republican women have vaginas too, or haven't you ever noticed? Talk about needing to get a clue!!!

Welcome, Cynthia!

If you happen to live in Northville and have some free time this evening, the Northville Democratic Club is meeting at 7:00 p.m. at the Cady Inn at Mill Race Village (off Griswold). We'd love to meet you!

I was a Republican for years but I too have switched over. The Republican party has gone off the deep end in the ways you mention and so many more. It has become a closed minded, anti-scientific, environment destroying, male oriented, gun toting cult that is too busy sucking up to the Koch Brothers and other major donors to care what constituents want.

It is particularly revealing how the party that supposedly champions smaller government and less regulation is legislating the exact OPPOSITE in this bill. Just for starters in HB 5711, we see:

An entirely new bureaucracy for the preservation and treatment of fetal remains -- new forms to be completed and tracked, new regulations for burial or cremation, even the involvement of funeral homes (perhaps they expect a brisk sale in shoebox-sized coffins and thimble-sized urns);

Mandatory minimums for malpractice insurance imposed on doctors -- which is particularly interesting given how Sen. Roger Kahn (an incompetent cardiologist before he became a blowhard right-wing hack) wants to make malpractice all-but-impossible to prove or litigate in Michigan.

Mandatory involvment of law enforcement in the interrogation of pregnant women that they're not being coerced, and in the investigation of any stillborn babies or miscarriages that occur in the fifth month of pregnancy or later. Don't our police officers have enough on their plates as is?

New and onerous regulations on clinics designed solely to force many of them to close. But as we know from GOP rhetoric, new regulations ALWAYS mean more bureaucrats to inspect facilites, write reports, enforce the new law...and kill jobs. Odd.

This law, like so many others imposed on the State since January 2011, is hypocritical and intentionally punitive. Only by taking back the Michigan House can this blood-red wave be stopped.

Party, Kevin. Not "parties." I totally reject the false argument that "both sides are to blame" in what has happened in Lansing since January 2011.

Democrats do not hold a single statewide office, control neither the House nor the Senate, and even when they manage to challenge some of the more onerous legislation, there are four hyper-partisan Republican Supreme Court justices to quell even that hope for redress.

Fortunately, three Supreme Court seats are up for election this November. You want to punish partisan hacks what "are not doing what we elected them to do?" Start with the Michigan Supreme Court by sayiing NO to the incumbents and YES to the "Three Supremes" -- Johnson, Kelley and McCormack.