Skip to comments.
pick up 12? lose 40? (this can't be right....) [STUPAK DEAL - THEY DON'T HAVE THE VOTES]
GretaWire ^
| 3/19/2010
| Greta
Posted on 03/19/2010 5:19:07 PM PDT by phrogphlyer
There is a plan to do a concurrent resolution to take the Senate bill, strike the Nelson language on abortion, and insert the Stupak language on abortion.
(Excerpt) Read more at gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com ...
TOPICS: Government; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: 111th; bhohealthcare; healthcare; michigan; obamacare; stupak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 next last
If Pelosi will make a deal on abortion, then she must really be desperate.
To: phrogphlyer
They can always find a way to fund “reproductive health” later on. What matters now it seizing the medical industry.
To: phrogphlyer
Honestly, who didn’t see this coming?
3
posted on
03/19/2010 5:20:44 PM PDT
by
Shaun_MD
To: phrogphlyer
they dont have the votes.
but then this bill is not the senate bill and they have to start again.
4
posted on
03/19/2010 5:21:02 PM PDT
by
ncalburt
(e)
To: phrogphlyer
>> If Pelosi will make a deal on abortion, then she must really be desperate.
I’m confused about the wholeness of the Senate bill. If changed, it goes back to the Senate providing the Slaughter method is not applied, right?
5
posted on
03/19/2010 5:22:50 PM PDT
by
Gene Eric
(Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
To: ncalburt
Without the swimmer though.
6
posted on
03/19/2010 5:23:31 PM PDT
by
Paladin2
To: phrogphlyer
Actually, the latest reports seem to indicate they may not need Stupak. And he certainly doesn't have twelve votes in his pocket anymore. I would suspect if this happens it's just a fig leaf for him to roll; they would offer him some vote at some point down the road while not giving a flip whether it has any viability or not.
Of course, I could always be wrong. We'll know on Monday.
To: phrogphlyer
If they change the language in the Senate bill in any way, it must go back to the full senate for a vote where it can be filibustered. Besides, the pro-abortion crowd isn’t giving up anything since there isn’t any federal funding for abortion now.
8
posted on
03/19/2010 5:25:01 PM PDT
by
Blood of Tyrants
(Truth - Reality through the eyes of God.)
To: phrogphlyer
Their lives for ours.
Their lives are more important.
Besides, they have their millions already.
9
posted on
03/19/2010 5:25:52 PM PDT
by
combat_boots
(The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
To: Gene Eric
Im confused about the wholeness of the Senate bill. If changed, it goes back to the Senate providing the Slaughter method is not applied, right?Im confused also .... I think this is the game plan ... to make us all throw up our hands and just scream for them to stop the insanity and go ahead and do whatever they want ..... !
To: phrogphlyer
Will this madness ever end?! This is not the way our Representative Constitutional Republic is supposed to work. Last minute deals and back-room bribes. There should be a law that every bill must be finalized one week before voting on it. Now, every bill is manipulated up until the last second. God help our country!
11
posted on
03/19/2010 5:26:30 PM PDT
by
Falcon28
(Allen West - 2012 * For a list of conservative candidates in 2010, see my profile)
To: phrogphlyer
12
posted on
03/19/2010 5:27:27 PM PDT
by
mathprof
To: phrogphlyer
Pelosi would abort her kids on the floor of the house if it meant satisfying her crazed moonbat base.
No way does this witch break abortion language.
13
posted on
03/19/2010 5:28:11 PM PDT
by
NoobRep
To: tired_old_conservative
I see this as desperation on her part .... she HAS to get Stupak’s group, to the point that she’d risk pissing off her base. And it might just cost her the whole bill.
14
posted on
03/19/2010 5:28:52 PM PDT
by
phrogphlyer
(Is it 2012 yet?)
To: NativeNewYorker
They can always find a way to fund reproductive health later on. What matters now it seizing the medical industry.You are exactly right. The real issue here is the violation of subsidiarity which allows them to pursue abortion at any time in the future.
If that is what is going on here, Stupak should not fall for it.
To: phrogphlyer
When you call, everyone should first quote from the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES of their Constitutional backed LEGAL FIRST ADMENDMENT RIGHTS !
Our first amendment right is a LEGAL RIGHT !
Anyone who denies or refuses our legal constitution right is breaking the supreme law of the land...
16
posted on
03/19/2010 5:32:19 PM PDT
by
American Constitutionalist
(There is no civility in the way the Communist/Marxist want to destroy the USA)
To: NoobRep
She’d abort somebody else’s kids. Remember, she’s more like an old sow than a witch.
17
posted on
03/19/2010 5:34:04 PM PDT
by
muawiyah
("Git Out The Way")
To: phrogphlyer
Members of Congress may be egg sucking, chicken stealing, gutter trash but generally they are not suicidal. I think there are dozens of YES congresspeople in vulnerable districts who have decided in the last week to switch to NO. To avoid threats, bribery attempts and harassment they will remain silent until they cast their vote.
18
posted on
03/19/2010 5:35:13 PM PDT
by
Brad from Tennessee
(A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.)
To: phrogphlyer
This is just stupid.
19
posted on
03/19/2010 5:35:50 PM PDT
by
Oceander
(The Price of Freedom is Eternal Vigilance -- Thos. Jefferson)
To: muawiyah
20
posted on
03/19/2010 5:37:04 PM PDT
by
NoobRep
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-42 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