advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 11, 2022 12:41PM
... should be happening soon, about 3PM EST. Watch here: [www.c-span.org]

... I'm sure there won't be any surprises; Manchin, Collins, and Murkowski have already said that they're voting no. Still, I do think it's good that the Dems are getting the votes on record.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Racer X
Date: May 11, 2022 02:03PM
Couldn't some flat tires have been arranged? secret smiley



********************************************
“A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand.” Seneca the Younger

The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)

Judge Lee wrote that “we cannot jettison our constitutional rights, even if the goal behind a law is laudable." 9th Circuit Court of Appeals

[www.youtube.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 11, 2022 03:52PM
Quote
Racer X
Couldn't some flat tires have been arranged? secret smiley

Quite.

Also, I wondered if anyone would abstain, or if that's even an option for this vote... and how that might affect an outcome. (Not that it would happen here, just hypothetically.)

Collins and Murkowski have advanced their own version of the bill, but the problem is that theirs is very nonspecific and doesn't have the backing of any pro-choice organizations (nor did they consult with any such organizations before writing their bill).




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: pdq
Date: May 11, 2022 03:58PM
I hope no one is fooled by the Murkowski/Collins fig leaf bill.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 11, 2022 04:05PM
49-51. It needed 60 votes which would never happen.



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 11, 2022 04:40PM
Quote
Speedy
49-51. It needed 60 votes which would never happen.

Yup. But it's now on the record, which could be a big problem for the Repubs come November if Roe gets overturned. I think some folks may not realize how much of a fallout there'll be from that -- that it's not just abortion that'll get tossed, but also some types of contraception, IVF, etc. Then there'll inevitably be conflicts between states where abortion is legal, versus those where it isn't. It's a huge can of whoop@$$ waiting to be opened.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 11, 2022 04:44PM
Once overturned, you have to continue to elect Repugs so that there can never be a law that would overturn the decision. Ever!



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Steve G.
Date: May 11, 2022 04:47PM
Every single Republican plus Manchin.
Make sure Americans know who to vote against...The Republicans.

This is the showdown folks.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 11, 2022 05:12PM
Quote
Steve G.
Every single Republican, includingplus Manchin.
Make sure Americans know who to vote against...the traitorsThe Republicans.

This is the showdown folks.

FTFY.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/11/2022 05:13PM by PeterB.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: May 11, 2022 07:23PM
Does anybody find it ironic that Republicans are preparing to force a new generation to have unwanted kids during a baby formula shortage and child care staffing crisis?

Maybe this will finally get the 18-35 voter turnout over 30%.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 11, 2022 07:33PM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Does anybody find it ironic that Republicans are preparing to force a new generation to have unwanted kids during a baby formula shortage and child care staffing crisis?

Maybe this will finally get the 18-35 voter turnout over 30%.

You forgot to mention, also during a period of deep economic hardship and racial turmoil... while children are being killed off in another country and the Republicans vote against giving additional aid to them... oh, and let's also not forget, during a pandemic with a lethal disease; one for which we don't currently yet have the approval to vaccinate babies and young kids.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Sam3
Date: May 12, 2022 03:33AM
And yet the media is ignoring all the positives that Biden has accomplished.

No talk about the positives, only negatives = low ratings of the President

The media is becoming complicit in our fall toward autocracy. I don't want to hear their wailing when their power gets taken away after Democracy falls.



The arts are not luxuries but assets that give way more than they cost.
--Ronald Tucker on YouTube

A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open.
--Frank Zappa
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 12, 2022 05:18AM
Quote
Sam3
The media is becoming complicit in our fall toward autocracy. I don't want to hear their wailing when their power gets taken away after Democracy falls.

There won’t be any wailing by the media in an autocracy.



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: NewtonMP2100
Date: May 12, 2022 07:02AM
....stoopid Munchin.....



_____________________________________

I reject your reality and substitute my own!
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Lux Interior
Date: May 12, 2022 07:45AM
Quote
Sam3
And yet the media is ignoring all the positives that Biden has accomplished.

No talk about the positives, only negatives = low ratings of the President

The media is becoming complicit in our fall toward autocracy. I don't want to hear their wailing when their power gets taken away after Democracy falls.

What?

Did you actually think the media was "Liberal"?

That was the second greatest trick the Devil pulled off.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 12, 2022 08:40AM
Quote
Sam3
And yet the media is ignoring all the positives that Biden has accomplished.

No talk about the positives, only negatives = low ratings of the President

The media is becoming complicit in our fall toward autocracy. I don't want to hear their wailing when their power gets taken away after Democracy falls.

I think a big part of the problem is that it's hard to prove a negative. For example, what would have happened to our economy had Biden NOT done what he's done? People are complaining about the economy and gas prices, etc., but had he not taken the steps he has, things could actually be quite worse. An interesting perspective from late 2021: [www.reuters.com]




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Diana
Date: May 12, 2022 11:01AM
Has anyone (meaning either you guys or the Washington @#$%& [formally referred to herein as the WW]) actually read the proposed Women's Health Protection Act?

Have you compared it to what the WW said in the Senate vote?

This proves that none of them apparently can read, or comprehend, or whatever ... like what is required to do their job.

The proposed Act says only one thing about abortion up to and including the moment of birth: it is only permitted if, in a doctor's medical opinion, that the woman's life or health is significantly jeopardized if the pregnancy is continued PAST the point of fetal viability. The only person specifically said who can make that decision is the health care provider, not the woman. Prior to the point of fetal viability, it is clear in saying that it is the woman's choice; she doesn't have to give a reason, the hoops that she is currently having to jump through are not allowed, the harassment she suffers is not allowed ....

The only difference I can see is that it codifies what is CURRENTLY permitted, not expands it.

But the biggest thing is at the bottom of the Act. Any state or government official, as described in the Act itself, is NOT immune if they violate the provisions of the act:

"(f) Abrogation Of State Immunity.—Neither a State that enforces or maintains, nor a government official (including a person described in section 7(c)) who is permitted to implement or enforce any limitation or requirement that violates section 4 shall be immune under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, or any other source of law, from an action in a Federal or State court of competent jurisdiction challenging that limitation or requirement."

So yeah, they can be sued and they can and will LOSE in a court of law.

This is NOT about protecting women, or the child, or the unborn, as they seem to imply or even explicitly state, but rather that they cannot impose their religious beliefs on others with impunity.

Hey, WW, do your freaking jobs! Read the bill(s) presented to you! THINK!!!!!!

If you cannot read something, cannot think about it, or cannot understand it, then it is time for you to go: get out of the way. Oh, and BTW, it isn't all about you but the American People. It isn't about you, or lining your pocket, or listening to only a vocal minority of your constituents--you represent US, as in all of us. Act like it.

A form of this is going to my Senator, even if I doubt that either he nor anyone in his office will read it. It will also go to those that may be elected in his place.

Edit: messages sent (to both of them). Research is underway as to replacement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/12/2022 11:36AM by Diana.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 12, 2022 01:37PM
Diana, the problem is that some of them DID read it, they just don't agree with it.

As one example, they weren't willing to pass something which outlawed the requirement of parental notification/consent. They see this as codifying something which goes beyond what is already allowed, since some states require this... therefore an expansion. (At least in their minds.)

It comes back to the issue that we're no longer a "United States of America", since apparently the idea is that each state can do whatever the heck it wants, even if that goes against previous SC rulings.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Spock
Date: May 12, 2022 02:33PM
Don't forget to point out that the Republicans and Manchin have now voted for an increase in crime.

Say what?

Freakonomics Steven LEVITT and John DONOHUE a professor of law at Stanford Law School, in their 2001 paper “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime” wrote that “Legalized abortion, appears to account for as much as 50 percent of the recent drop in crime.”

Ban abortions and in 15 years or so "the unwanted" will be committing crimes. Thank you GOP.

On the other hand the Prison–industrial complex will be delighted.



Comedy Central: Best news channel that isn't a news channel.

Fox News: Best comedy channel that isn't a comedy channel.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: AllGold
Date: May 12, 2022 03:01PM
I can't find a link but last night Joyce Vance fact checked Joe Manchin's whining.

Manchin said he would have voted for codification of Roe but this goes way too far; it overrides something like 500 state laws.

Vance responded that that might be true in some hyper-technical sense, but what the act really does is eliminate the significant barriers being put in place to the access of what Roe grants, like waiting periods and multiple appointments. In effect, it's not an expansion, it only eliminates much of the B.S. that states are enacting in order to give women the rights they were already supposed to have.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Acer
Date: May 12, 2022 03:04PM
Um, isn't the POINT of the legislation to over-ride an unworkable conglomeration of conflicting state laws?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: PeterB
Date: May 12, 2022 04:29PM
Quote
Acer
Um, isn't the POINT of the legislation to over-ride an unworkable conglomeration of conflicting state laws?

Not if the states all each want to do their own thing, e.g., "we don't want no stinkin' guvmint tellin' us what ta do!"

... and yet, apparently they have no problem with McConnell maybe passing a federal ban on abortions.

Quote
AllGold
In effect, it's not an expansion, it only eliminates much of the B.S. that states are enacting in order to give women the rights they were already supposed to have.

... but that's the whole point. They WANT the B.S. in place, because they want to be able to harass women seeking abortions.

... the other thing that really burns me up about all of this is, it's all based on (mostly) Evangelical Christian theology, which isn't -- by far -- what everyone believes. Striking down Roe would seem to violate everyone's First Amendment's right to freedom of religion... if a doctor or abortion provider is legitimate to refuse to provide an abortion based on their religious beliefs (as many/most of the Republicans believe, and Susan Collins has made a point of), they should also be able to refuse to NOT provide an abortion based on their religious beliefs. Likewise, if a religion explicitly permits/condones abortion, then by a woman's not being provided one, her First Amendment rights are being violated.




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Ombligo
Date: May 12, 2022 05:48PM
As Peter points out, there are first amendment issues that will be raised and this will likely go before SCOTUS again.

Some states are passing laws based upon life beginning at conception - that is not believed by several faiths - Judaism and Buddism being two. Then the Satanic Church claims abortion is a sacrament and outlawing it goes against their faith. That approach will rely upon previous rulings that allowed the use of Cannabis and @#$%& for religious reasons while it was still generally outlawed.



“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.” -- François de La Rochefoucauld

"Those who cannot accept the past are condemned to revise it." -- Geo. Mathias
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Diana
Date: May 13, 2022 12:43AM
Well, I fired off emails to both my Senators (both Repubs); Inhofe hasn't responded--he's up for reelection in 2026, so I don't really expect him to. However, Junior Senator Lankford, who also participated in the attempted coup 1/6, is up for reelection in June. I received a canned form letter in response from him.

All the points everyone is bringing up were iterated in that missive. This doesn't surprise me.

Don't get me wrong: I am neither pro abortion, nor anti. All I can say is what I think as it applies to me. I am not my sister's keeper. It isn't my business. It's hers. She needs support and love at a difficult and, in some cases, a soul-destroying period of time in her life. There is no "win" here. My opinion to her is worth less than a fart in the wind. But I WILL fight for the right for my sister to make that choice.

Basically, the bill says that it isn't your business what the woman does, it isn't anyone's business; this is a protected medical procedure between the patient and the doctor, so buzz off. If the question was about a man getting a vasectomy, it would be no big deal. Wait, it IS NO BIG DEAL. The hypocrisy is stunning.

The bill: The bill
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 13, 2022 01:29AM
Diana, thanks.



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Janit
Date: May 13, 2022 07:22AM
Quote
Diana
Well, I fired off emails to both my Senators (both Repubs); Inhofe hasn't responded--he's up for reelection in 2026, so I don't really expect him to. However, Junior Senator Lankford, who also participated in the attempted coup 1/6, is up for reelection in June. I received a canned form letter in response from him.

All the points everyone is bringing up were iterated in that missive. This doesn't surprise me.

Don't get me wrong: I am neither pro abortion, nor anti. All I can say is what I think as it applies to me. I am not my sister's keeper. It isn't my business. It's hers. She needs support and love at a difficult and, in some cases, a soul-destroying period of time in her life. There is no "win" here. My opinion to her is worth less than a fart in the wind. But I WILL fight for the right for my sister to make that choice.

Basically, the bill says that it isn't your business what the woman does, it isn't anyone's business; this is a protected medical procedure between the patient and the doctor, so buzz off. If the question was about a man getting a vasectomy, it would be no big deal. Wait, it IS NO BIG DEAL. The hypocrisy is stunning.

The bill: The bill

Diana,

Thanks. I always find your posts to be informative and thought-provoking.

AND I have one piece of feedback regarding your commentary.

I would be more comfortable with a rephrasing that it is wrong to impose Evangelical Christian and/or Catholic dogma on everyone in a country that is supposed to be founded on the separation of church and state.

The phrase "Judeo-Christian" is a phrase invented by Christians, not by Jews. When I see it I always ask whether the intention is truly inclusive or more nefarious, as it is often used by Christians who are presuming things about the relationship between Judaism and Christianity that Jews find to be untrue. It's usage tends to imply a fixity of dogma.

The possibility that the term "Judeo-Christian" might be a dog whistle is not obvious to many -- after all, that is the nature of dog whistles.

The Jewish arguments around "when life begins" are different from the Christian arguments, and the life of the mother is paramount. Although there may be a range of opinions along the spectrum of Jewish practice, the subtext surrounding Jewish discussions is quite different from the subtext surrounding Christian ones.

I imagine many Christians are also uncomfortable about being lumped together with Evangelical and Catholic dogma under the term "Judeo-Christian."
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Steve G.
Date: May 13, 2022 08:43AM
The "Judeo-Christian" phrase is a joke.

Only the Christers believe it. ( I first ran across that word watching 'Deadwood'. Apparently it was used => 1917, L. V. Hodgkin, A Book of Quaker Saints)

Christer Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
[www.merriam-webster.com] › dictionary › Christer
The meaning of CHRISTER is a Christian who is perceived as being overly pious or self-righteous or who proselytizes frequently.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/13/2022 08:51AM by Steve G..
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Diana
Date: May 13, 2022 11:32AM
Thanks to both Janit and Steve G. I knew I could count on you.

The phrase "Judeo-Christian" was problematic for me. My enfeebled brain couldn't come up with a better term; I hated to use it but it was the closest that I could come to to express my feelings (it's an oxymoron at best and downright insulting if you really think about it). I like Janit's

"... it is wrong to impose Evangelical Christian and/or Catholic dogma on everyone in a country that is supposed to be founded on the separation of church and state."

This will be worked into the text prior to sending it back to the moron who sent it to me. I know that he: (a) won't read it; (b) will misconstrue what I say; and/or (c) twistedly use my arguments to further his agenda. And make no mistake, an agenda is present here.

Steve G.: Thanks, I love expanding my vocabulary. emoticon_love The term fits perfectly, even though few are familiar with it.

As for reworking:

Your perspective on when life begins is flawed and based on Judeo-Christian teaching Evangelical Christian and/or Catholic dogma, not science. Other religions have other ideas as to when life begins, and take exception to your "perspective." So tell me, is your "perspective" based on actual Science and/or Medical Opinion, or is it what someone else told you, as in your church leader(s)? Expect that this will be brought back up on religious grounds, as you cannot have it both ways. I was taught that America was founded on the separation of church and state. What about you?

I thought about adding something along the lines of:

"I was taught by my father (both biological and the one above AND his son) that it is wrong to impose myself on others (something about giving to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's?); to love one another as you would yourself (hold your own self to the same level as you hold others); judgement is the Lord's alone; and the nature of love, forgiveness and even compassion as stated in all the teachings I have seen (and I have read quite a few and I'm always interested in reading more) either state or implicitly imply that you DON'T proselytize but accept your fellow man (woman?) with all of their flaws for who they are, not who you THINK they should be. It is God who made the variety in the world, and dismissing it or criticizing it is dismissing and criticizing God. That doesn't sound very Christian to me.

There are hard truths to be acknowledged in the American system of government; the biggest one is that the Church (in all it forms) is not welcome in Government. While the Church may have moral authority over its members and therefore it can (and rightly should) impose a way of life over its members, it should not, cannot, and will not have authority in Governmental and State matters. Render to God what is God's, and to Caesar what is Caesar's, remember? To do otherwise reduces us a theocracy, the exact same thing as the founders fled when they came to the new world."

But that sounds more like, at best, a soapbox to me so I leave it out. Opinions?

It seems incredible that I would have to explain this to a supposedly grown MAN.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: $tevie
Date: May 13, 2022 12:41PM
Quote
Steve G.
Every single Republican plus Manchin.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: Vote today in the Senate
Posted by: Speedy
Date: May 13, 2022 02:38PM
Diana, you might mention that women will die in service to your floor vote which is just a manipulative part of your re-election campaign even though you have those easily manipulated voters locked-in. By 2 : 1, Americans support Roe v. Wade.



Saint Cloud, Minnesota, where the weather is wonderful even when it isn't.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 132
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020