1 edit
@no1marauder saidWell then what the hell are they waiting for? they have the house/senate and executive all wrapped up.
Cuellar's opposition vote meant jack; the Democrats in the House passed the bill.
The truth is 99% of Congressional Democrats support codifying Roe.
Also, why don't Antifa/BLM get going on a petition to pass a new amendment. Liberals are funny.
@earl-of-trumps saidand not funny ha ha
Well then what the hell are they waiting for? they have the house/senate and executive all wrapped up.
Also, why don't Antifa/BLM get going on a petition to pass a new amendment. Liberals are funny.
@shallow-blue saidhow quickly you forget the Okeefe videos
And nobody is aborting those, not even in these oh so demoniacal Netherlands.
@earl-of-trumps saidThey are waiting for another Senator who isn't like Manchin.
Well then what the hell are they waiting for? they have the house/senate and executive all wrapped up.
Also, why don't Antifa/BLM get going on a petition to pass a new amendment. Liberals are funny.
Really you right wingers know this. And you don't have to try to play dumb; that is always most people's default belief about you.
@Earl-of-Trumps
I guess you don't know to get that through the senate require SIXTY votes not 51. NO repub will vote for it. But you knew that already......
1 edit
@no1marauder saidClean up the corruption in your own party. You know who they are.
Yes, "these Democrats". They and Cuellar of Texas are a bit over 1% of Congressional Democrats.
Manchin sits on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and supports a comprehensive, "all-of-the-above" energy approach that includes coal.
Manchin received the most funding from the oil and gas industry of any senator from May 2020 to May 2021 including $1.6 million in donations from fossil fuel PACs.
On February 12, 2021, Sinema became the second Democratic senator after Joe Manchin to announce her opposition to including a $15/hour minimum wage as part of a COVID-19 relief bill. Sinema told The Washington Post that she is "against eliminating the filibuster" and "not open to changing her mind" on the issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrsten_Sinema
This is not the first time they have betrayed their own party.
@no1marauder saidHere is an article from January 22, 2021
Yes, "these Democrats". They and Cuellar of Texas are a bit over 1% of Congressional Democrats.
Dore was right. Both Obama and Biden made the pledge.
"President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris recommitted Friday to “codifying Roe v. Wade” on the 48th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide as pro-life advocates vowed to fight the administration’s pro-choice agenda."
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/22/biden-harris-commit-codifying-roe-pro-lifers-decry/
@jj-adams saidI am sure the leak was intentional.
Does anyone else think that the leak was intentional so they could see the public's reaction and maybe change their mind?
It is to divide people and distract them from the truth coming out about Ukraine and how NATO expansion provoked Russia. In other words, their anti Russia propaganda is failing and they desperately need to change the subject in the news.
@no1marauder saidWould you be in favor of first amending the WHPA to limit the federal protection of post-viability abortions to where necessary to save the life of the mother like NY Penal Law does?
The truth is 99% of Congressional Democrats support codifying Roe.
@metal-brain saidHaving political positions and getting donations from those who like those political positions is not corruption. It's politics. Always had been.
Clean up the corruption in your own party. You know who they are.
Manchin sits on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and supports a comprehensive, "all-of-the-above" energy approach that includes coal.
Manchin received the most funding from the oil and gas industry of any senator from May 2020 to May 2021 including $1.6 million in donations from fossi ...[text shortened]... .wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyrsten_Sinema
This is not the first time they have betrayed their own party.
@sh76 said(Shrug) IF that could get it passed, sure.
Would you be in favor of first amending the WHPA to limit the federal protection of post-viability abortions to where necessary to save the life of the mother like NY Penal Law does?
But since there's no path to 60 votes in the Senate no matter how it is amended and insufficient votes to end the filibuster even for abortion rights, what's your point?
@no1marauder saidMy point is that, as presently constituted, it ought to be opposed on moral grounds, even by most pro-abortion activists. This is a classic example of a bill introduced with no chance of passage to be used as a cudgel against those who do not support it.
(Shrug) IF that could get it passed, sure.
But since there's no path to 60 votes in the Senate no matter how it is amended and insufficient votes to end the filibuster even for abortion rights, what's your point?
If a bill were introduced that would codify an abortion right that went no further than Casey, I would probably support it. This bill is wildly beyond anything SCOTUS has ever said, and failure to support this bill is not the same thing as being in favor of scrapping Roe and Casey.
@sh76 saidStop the BS. There is no possibility any bill that codifies Roe and Casey could pass the Senate under the present rules. IF it was simply a matter of amending it and sending it back to a conference committee your position might have some merit but you, I and everybody else knows that isn't going to happen.
My point is that, as presently constituted, it ought to be opposed on moral grounds, even by most pro-abortion activists. This is a classic example of a bill introduced with no chance of passage to be used as a cudgel against those who do not support it.
If a bill were introduced that would codify an abortion right that went no further than Casey, I would probably supp ...[text shortened]... and failure to support this bill is not the same thing as being in favor of scrapping Roe and Casey.
4 edits
@no1marauder saidThey keep chipping away at the filibuster on other things. They could say they're dumping the filibuster on bills passed under the enforcement clause of the 14th Amendment or something. (There's some logic to that if you think about it.)
Stop the BS. There is no possibility any bill that codifies Roe and Casey could pass the Senate under the present rules. IF it was simply a matter of amending it and sending it back to a conference committee your position might have some merit but you, I and everybody else knows that isn't going to happen.
Of course it's probably not going to actually happen, but if they're going to introduce a bill, they should introduce one that actually deserves to pass and not that the vast majority of Americans are going to consider morally bankrupt as written.