Digby says it all:

Stupak and Nelson have finally given the liberals in the House a serious, principled reason to walk away. The dynamics still argue that they won't do it for this or any other reason, and that they will simply allow women to get shafted. (There is apparently no limit to the amount of shit the left must be forced to eat to get this bill passed.)

But the stakes are now higher for liberals than they have been. Voting to restrict a woman's ability to exercize her right to abortion in half the country is as much of a gut check as voting for a bill that doesn't contain a public option. Some might actually calculate that it's a bridge too far. And those who were already leaning toward voting against the bill for all those other reasons will now feel much more secure that they are standing up for liberal principles when they do it.

There is such a thing as the straw that broke the camel's back, even for liberals who desperately want to pass health care reform. This might be it.

Diana DeGette and Louise Slaughter are not on the bandwagon to eliminate a fundamental right for women.

They say the new compromise is possibly unconstitutional, and that they and other pro-choice House members could still reject it.

Big, bad Kent Conrad rattled the Senate sword:

The chairman of the Senate Budget Committee says the House must stick close to the Senate's version of health care reform or risk losing the 60 votes needed to pass it in the Senate.

I agree with Howard Dean that this version of HCR should be DOA.

You had the best chance in decades to make a difference in all of our lives, and you chose to blow it. You don't deserve our praise. Or our votes.

http://www.americablog.com/2009/12/this-isnt-what-we-were-promised.html