Skip to comments.
Stupak Abortion Language to Be Substituted for Senate Language in Deal to Secure Health Care Votes
FiredogLake ^
| 3/19/10
| Jane Hamsher
Posted on 03/19/2010 7:45:03 PM PDT by LdSentinal
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161 next last
Never, ever, trust a Democrat.
To: LdSentinal
To be reversed at a later date. And, he knows it.
2
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:07 PM PDT
by
Know et al
(Everything I know I read in the newspaper and that's the reason for my ignorance: Will Rogers)
To: LdSentinal
May they all burn in Hell!!
3
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:13 PM PDT
by
GoCards
("We eat therefore we hunt...")
To: LdSentinal
Can’t do it, if the Senate bill is not passed word for word, it has to go back to the Senate. It cannot go to the President unless NO CHANGES ARE MADE.
4
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:21 PM PDT
by
gidget7
("When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property." Thomas Jefferson)
To: LdSentinal
You are right.. Stupak will fold..
5
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:40 PM PDT
by
JoanneSD
To: LdSentinal
6
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:45 PM PDT
by
Army Air Corps
(Four fried chickens and a coke)
To: LdSentinal
There is no confirmation of this anywhere.
Why the heck would Stupak agree for a vote AFTER the Senate bill? Pelosi could just get the Senate bill passed, then not allow a vote on the Stupak provision. The pro-lifers would be played.
7
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:54 PM PDT
by
mrs9x
To: LdSentinal
They gain the Stupak 12 but lose 40 pro abortion votes if I understand this correctly.
8
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:54 PM PDT
by
Man50D
(Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
To: Know et al
This conflicts with what NRO is reporting
9
posted on
03/19/2010 7:47:56 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Is that a bomb in your pants, or are you excited to come to America?")
To: LdSentinal
10
posted on
03/19/2010 7:48:55 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Is that a bomb in your pants, or are you excited to come to America?")
To: LdSentinal
To: mrs9x
This website is liberal right? They are f#$in with us. Dont believe it yet.
12
posted on
03/19/2010 7:49:35 PM PDT
by
GoCards
("We eat therefore we hunt...")
To: LdSentinal
How will this affect the count ?
Will the so-called pro-choice people now switch to “no” votes ?
All getting a bit confusing, pretty pitiful when the party with a clear majority has to resort to tricks and doublespeak to get something passed by its own members.
13
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:03 PM PDT
by
1066AD
To: LdSentinal
Tell Stupak the GOP will vote present on his sidecar. There will never be 216 Dem votes to pass it. Let Stupak make his decision based on that.
14
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:07 PM PDT
by
xkaydet65
(Never compromise with evil! Even in the face of Armageddon!! Rorshach)
To: LdSentinal
Am I being a little too optimistic in hoping that I hear the sounds of a little 'rat'ty cat-fight starting up?
15
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:28 PM PDT
by
Oceander
(The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
To: LdSentinal
His amendment will lose, then I guess he votes for healthcare anyway or the other dems will probably pass it anyway.
Glad he opposes federal funding of abortion, but please remember he is another left wing fool who otherwise totally supports the health care disaster.
16
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:35 PM PDT
by
Williams
(It's the policies, stupid)
To: GoCards
17
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:59 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
("Is that a bomb in your pants, or are you excited to come to America?")
To: LdSentinal
So everything Stupek just said on Greta live was a lie...
Somehow I don’t think this guy Stupek is STUPID. He is prolife all the way and isn’t going to be threatened, bribed, or coerced in any manner.
18
posted on
03/19/2010 7:50:59 PM PDT
by
HD1200
To: JoanneSD
No he won’t. Stupek isn’t folding.
19
posted on
03/19/2010 7:51:47 PM PDT
by
HD1200
To: gidget7
Can’t do it, if the Senate bill is not passed word for word, it has to go back to the Senate. It cannot go to the President unless NO CHANGES ARE MADE. You are absolutely right gidget7. A constitutional case relating to the enrollment of two bills was decided in 1995, I believe.
The writer of that opinion? John Paul Stevens
20
posted on
03/19/2010 7:52:10 PM PDT
by
UAConservative
(Audemus Jura Nostra Defendere | Current count: 210 Y - 221 N | ROLL TIDE!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 161 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
