Posted on 11/02/2013 9:41:02 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Senate Republicans, led by South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, are pushing for a federal ban on abortions after the end of the 20th week of pregnancy. …
The planned legislation, though, will face many challenges, not only from the Democratic-controlled Senate, but from some Republicans like Sen. Mike Lee, Utah, who has concerns about Congress’ authority to regulate commerce as the law’s basis. …
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
He’s just jerking off.
Must be an election year.
its a bit hard to believe that anybody representing the state of Utah could be against this bill
Just Lindsay trying to re-establish his “cred” before 2014, I think.
Remember these same republicans tell us if you don’t have the votes don’t bother to fight it. He know he doesn’t have the vote, what is he trying to pull here? Pretend to fight for something he know that will never pass
How long has he been in the senate? He could have proposed this when there were more votes, when there was a more vaforable scotus, and when there was a “pro-life” president. Why now? Oh I know.
No, its all for show.
Yup. This buck dancing faker is up for election in 2014. Perhaps a primary challenge too. So he is doing head fakes to the right.
This proposed bill is just a dog & pony show by Lindsey Graham and other ‘moderate’ Republicans to divert the conservative base from the recent cave in which allows runaway federal spending & borrowing to continue. The Fed. Reserve has been tossing worthless paper dollar money out the window, yet our economy is still stalled, many are still jobless & a lot of former workers have given up and no longer look for work.
The loose money policy has only helped Wall Street [stocks & banks up] and big business [easy borrowing to juice up balance sheets instead of better sales]. Joe & Jane Peon are still struggling.
The Commerce Clause issue is a genuine one. Just as there’s no Commerce Clause ground for homicide statutes generally, there’s no Commerce Clause ground for federal anti-abortion statutes. There’s may be a 14th Amendment ground for a federal anti-abortion statute - as a deprivation of life without due process - but only in the minority of cases in which the state itself is implicated in the abortion (e.g., administered by government doctors in a government hospital).
To be wary of federal anti-abortion statutes is not to be pro-abortion, any more than those wary of federal anti-rape and federal anti-homicide statutes are advocates of rape and murder.
Perfect timing after it was released last week that his approval numbers are in free fall. I wondered what he would do to look less liberal.
As it was prior to Roe v. Wade, abortion is a state matter.
Yeah? Let’s see him shut down the government to get it. What a clown.
Immoral. Unconstitutional.
These RINOs are so transparent.
Unless Lindsay gets a doppelganger to replace Harry Reid when he introduces the Bill it won’t make it past Reid’s Paper Shredder.
I think this is a cry for help from poor Lindsay.
Well, it is now less than 60 days before the arrival of the 2014 election year—time for Little Lindsey to pretend that he is a true conservative.
Sorry Lindsey, we’re not buying a single bit of it. You’re going down to defeat in 2014.
Lindsay is a girl's name right?
Quite a conundrum.
The equal protection of the God-given, individual, unalienable right to life, is the primary raison d'etre, or reason for the existence of, all governments. In every branch. Federal and state.
This is the cornerstone principle of this free republic.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..."
And it is absolutely required by the supreme law of the land, our Constitution, which every officer of government, in every branch, at every level, is absolutely required to swear to support and defend:
"No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law."
"No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.