Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

McConnell votes 'NO' to defunding Planned Parenthood!!!
August 03, 2015 | CivilWarBrewing

Posted on 08/03/2015 3:02:17 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing

The vote to DEFUND Planned Parenthood FAILS in the Senate!


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: Kentucky; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 114th; bill; defunding; parenthood; planned; senaterules; strategery; strategic; strategicvote; uniparty
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-232 next last
To: AFreeBird

Idiot..get informed as to why he voted no.


201 posted on 08/03/2015 11:41:46 PM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: fifedom

Not really. The vote allows each Senator’s vote to be recorded. That is worth something. It takes 60 votes to win a cloture vote, not 50.


202 posted on 08/03/2015 11:45:21 PM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: csivils

Be informed and not stupid like most people on this site. You can do better.


203 posted on 08/03/2015 11:46:55 PM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Norm Lenhart

McConnell got all but one republican. He needed 60 votes and there are not 60 republicans. Why is this so hard to understand?


204 posted on 08/03/2015 11:49:21 PM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat

Really...this is not a new procedure. Even a casual listener and reader of the news would have encountered this procedure numerous times. Do your research and then get back to me.


205 posted on 08/03/2015 11:54:32 PM PDT by Dave W
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 151 | View Replies]

To: Dave W

Because as Cruz said, he could have played hardball and attached it to the highway bill and he chose political theater over the lives of babies. As do his defenders.


206 posted on 08/03/2015 11:58:09 PM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Dave W

Couldn’t be simpler. you take 10 remotely conservative Repubs each with a briefcase. In those briefcases is $10M in cash each temporarily borrowed from some of the conservative donors.

Each Pub meets with one endangered Democrat and explains to them that that 10M will be spent on their opponent and lawyers, and that Mitch is completely unaware of the proceedings. You then simply close the briefcase and walk away reminding them that caucusing with the GOP on the PP matter solves many mutual problems and that 9 other Dems are currently in an identical meeting and if word gets out, money gets spent.

Then return the cash to the donors and get on with defunding PP.

Simple. Legal. People fund opposition every day.


207 posted on 08/04/2015 1:26:04 AM PDT by Norm Lenhart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

I appreciate the correction and better information, FRiend.


208 posted on 08/04/2015 4:09:47 AM PDT by MortMan (All those in favor of gun control raise both hands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Rides_A_Red_Horse

no, I supported Matt Bevin in the primary...even though I’m not in Kentucky. I didn’t vote in Kentucky, so I had nothing to do with McConnell winning. I also don’t vote in Mississippi, but supported Chris McDaniels in the primary.

I don’t live in Ohio....so I’ve never done helped Boehner either. It’s pretty childish of you to think I “own” any of these cretins......I didn’t create them...I’m not that powerful.

And I bet I was 16 years ahead of you on McCain.....I’ve been writing about McCain since 1992.....


209 posted on 08/04/2015 4:10:13 AM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (WTF? How Karl Rove and the Establishment Lost...Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: Dave W

Rare moments of weakness from semi-ethical dems.


210 posted on 08/04/2015 4:11:28 AM PDT by MortMan (All those in favor of gun control raise both hands!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarBrewing
WHO HERE ACTUALLY BELIEVED THE GOPe WOULD DEFUND PLANNED PARENTHOOD?

211 posted on 08/04/2015 4:34:48 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Its the Sixties all over again, but with crappy music...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GIdget2004
the Speaker votes ‘no’ which allows him to bring it around again

Exactly what happened. Bunch of FReepers got their panties in a wad 'cause they don't understand the parliamentary rules.

212 posted on 08/04/2015 4:49:40 AM PDT by Drango (A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Drango

-— Bunch of FReepers got their panties in a wad ‘cause they don’t understand the parliamentary rules -—

Then again, McConnell voted against it when he prevented it from being attached to the highway bill. A bunch of Freepers know what’s really going on.


213 posted on 08/04/2015 4:56:04 AM PDT by St_Thomas_Aquinas ( Isaiah 22:22, Matthew 16:19, Revelation 3:7)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: okie01
-- Specifically, a Senator who votes "No" on a bill has the right to bring the issue up for reconsideration at any time in the future --

Motion to reconsider has to be made by a senator on the prevailing side. In this case, the prevailing side was a "no" vote. The typical condition for a motion to reconsider is when some measure PASSES, and moving for reconsideration is a signal that enough members want to sleep on passage before finally committing it. The Congressional Record is full of "amendment/bill passed, move to lay the motion to reconsider on the table, motion to table reconsideration passed" events. Here is a recent example:

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session to consider the following nominations: Calendar Nos. 139, 140, and 141; that the Senate proceed to vote without intervening action or debate on the nominations in the order listed; that the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to the nominations; that any related statements be printed in the Record; that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

A motion to reconsider a passed cloture motion is total nonsense, because the effect of a passed cloture vote (and of a failed cloture vote, for that matter) is to continue debate on the subject.

214 posted on 08/04/2015 5:01:19 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarBrewing

Relax. That no vote by the majority leader is just a procedural vote under the stupid Senate rules so he could bring it up again at a later date.


215 posted on 08/04/2015 5:51:41 AM PDT by Old Retired Army Guy (frequently.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CivilWarBrewing

All the Republicans have to do (all the ever had to do) is refuse to support any spending bill that funds PP. I can think of nothing better than a government shutdown. This is the LOTE Party (lesser of two evils) though. They will completely fund PP in the next budget. It will happen something like it has in the past: it will come in multiple staged votes with promises of amendments which won’t happen (Iran deal, TPP), will have a tax cut or increase with a promise to defund PP later (Fiscal Cliff), or it will simply fund PP at current levels and raise funding elsewhere (which will get funneled back to PP) [the last shutdown, Ryan/Murray budget].

I’m looking forward to the day when “McConnell votes no on defunding Planned Parenthood” creates as much shock and outrage as “Barbara Boxer votes no to defund Planned Parenthood.” That will mean we’ve moved on from this futile attempt at reforming the LOTE Party.


216 posted on 08/04/2015 6:28:00 AM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Retired Army Guy
"...so he could bring it up again at a later date."

The "moderates"/vote for republicans blindly are the ones that are being duped.

What purpose would this "procedural vote" do to create another "stand alone" appropriation/cut piece of legislation? McConnell knows this will never pass cloture. So, he votes no, refuses hardball tactics via attachments/riders, and laughs at the Republican or else idiots who trust in futile "poker tactics" of keeping this subject "on deck".

Now if McConnell has a plan that will work and meet the objective then I will change my POV. Unfortunately McConnell's track record is awful so my skepticism remains.
217 posted on 08/04/2015 6:55:13 AM PDT by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: houeto

ok


218 posted on 08/04/2015 7:06:35 AM PDT by WENDLE (Make America great again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: WENDLE

Thanks WENDLE!


219 posted on 08/04/2015 7:26:49 AM PDT by houeto (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: WENDLE

Ooohhhh....noob troll love fest


220 posted on 08/04/2015 8:07:27 AM PDT by clintonh8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-232 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson