General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSenate Democrats Win As Mitch McConnell Caves On Abortion Language In Trafficking Bill
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/04/21/senate-democrats-win-mitch-mcconnell-caves-abortion-language-trafficking-bill.htmlSenate Democrats Win As Mitch McConnell Caves On Abortion Language In Trafficking Bill
By: Jason Easley
Tuesday, April, 21st, 2015, 11:16 am
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was dealt another defeat by Senate Democrats as he was forced to abandon his attempt to add expanded anti-abortion language to the human trafficking bill.
The Hill reported:
.
Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nev.), who helped hash out the deal, claimed victory.
After weeks of stalling on the bipartisan human trafficking bill our Republican colleagues have agreed not to expand the scope of the Hyde language, he said.
Senate Republicans are trying to sell the agreement on the language as bipartisan governing, but in reality this was a defeat for McConnell. The Senator from Kentucky tried to prove that he could force his agenda down the throat of Democrats, but his power play failed miserably. Democrats never budged. With pressure growing on Senate Republicans to demonstrate that they can govern, they had no choice but to look for a face-saving escape route out of their own mess.
McConnell intentionally picked this fight with Senate Democrats by adding abortion language to the Senate legislation that wasnt in the House-passed bill. The senator made things worse on himself with the decision to double down by holding a final vote on Loretta Lynchs nomination to be the next attorney general hostage.
The compromise deal is a big win for Senate Democrats. It also proves that the real power in the Senate rests on the Democratic side. Nothing will get done in the Senate without the support of some Democratic.
Mitch McConnell tried to bully Senate Democrats, and the result was a defeat for the increasingly incompetent looking Senate Majority Leader.
cilla4progress
(24,733 posts)Thank you!
Hekate
(90,686 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,986 posts)No more excuses turtle man.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)before a vote takes place. The assholes aren't going to let a vote happen.
okaawhatever
(9,462 posts)MineralMan
(146,308 posts)This story is why.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)Or maybe you meant Specter.
MineralMan
(146,308 posts)And you know it is. Nice try.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)There is the concept of "the devil you know". And I think we kid ourselves when we elect anything with a D after their name. At best it is an occasional benefit, and at worse it is an act of self deception. Just about the time you really need this person, they cut your legs out. Better to know where you start up front.
The democrats spent the better part of the late '50s and early '60s "desegregating" the party, and forcing the southern democrats to support democratic positions. I'm not sure running around telling people we had to keep a "tent" big enough for the bigots to be included would have been such a great idea. Is there pain in the process? Sure. But we've spent about 20 years with the "anyone with a D" approach and what we've got to show for it is a middle class in decline, a banking system that seems to live on the edge of disaster, and ever increasing frequency and aggressiveness in our wars. And mostly it seems to have driven our opposition further and further to the right.
One can make a case that occasionally we ought to invite certain people to go join the other party. It's not purity, it's honesty, with ourselves, the electorate, and to be quite honest, with the people who should be in the other party to keep it from going too far to the right.
Gore1FL
(21,132 posts)I'd much rather have Reid than McConnell, though I don't see Reid as a prize.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)Midnight Writer
(21,765 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)You should vote for the guy that represents your ideals, not just that has a D after their name, despite the fact that he might lose.
Midnight Writer
(21,765 posts)Truthfully, only a few Ds represent my ideals. But it is a numbers game. I know from the current lockstep party voting that every single R will vote against my ideals (as well as my personal interests). The only possible path for a legislative victory by an Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders or Sherwood Brown is more Ds.
It is an ugly salad, I grant you. LBJ was an odious human being, yet he pushed through Medicare, Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, and a slew of labor protections. On the other hand, he escalated the Cold War and its bastard child, the Vietnam "conflict". But can you possibly believe that Goldwater would have been a better choice on any one of these issues? Remember, Goldwater wanted to nuke SE Asia (as well as invading Cuba and a nuclear showdown with the USSR) and was openly against Medicare, Civil Rights, Voting Rights and labor protections. Hell, he even wanted to repeal Social Security. His positions are the template for the current conservative politics.
If my choice is a piece of the pie, or starve to death, I'll take the pie and live to fight another day.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)calimary
(81,267 posts)This is just further proof that OUR team has no idea who they're really dealing with. NO idea. I've heard angles expressed in the coverage about this - wherein this was a problem the Dems let slip by because nobody noticed the abortion language buried in the bill. NOBODY caught it beforehand and nipped it in the bud. NOBODY NOTICED. Which means - either NOBODY BOTHERED to read the damn thing all the way through, or carefully enough. OR that the Dems just assumed everything was straightforward and on the up-'n'-up. GULLIBLE AND NAIVE. They assume, wrongly, that these fiends on the other side of the aisle are A) still their friends, B) willing to work together, C) guileless, NOT agenda-driven, not into stealth tactics, and definitely not sneaky. In other words, NOBODY EVEN HAD THEIR RADAR UP. It obviously never even occurred to anybody on OUR side that this might happen. Nobody was even the tiniest bit suspicious, evidently.
AND THAT'S JUST ONE GIGANTIC AND COLOSSALLY STUPID MISTAKE!!!!!!!!
AND WHY THE FUCK DON'T OUR PEOPLE GET WITH THAT PROGRAM???? Where are OUR stealth fighters? Where are OUR schemers and sneaky-ass strategists who will try this in the furtherance of OUR agenda???? WHY DON'T WE RESPOND ACCORDINGLY WITH OUR LEGISLATION?????
Our side better start going through EVERY GOP-authored or sponsored bill with tweezers, microscopes, fine-tooth combs, X-rays and even maybe some MRI machines - to make DAMN SURE they don't get rolled again - the way they almost did this time. Negligence is NOT AN OPTION!!!!!!
We don't have anybody in power who's thinking deviously, do we? WE NEED SOME. That's the only way we're gonna stay ahead of these assholes. They have entire ARMIES of devious thinkers working for them. Do we have ANYBODY?????????
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)And all the other women's groups who coordinated ACTION.
FUCKING PUKES!!!!!!!!!!!
malthaussen
(17,195 posts)... but I wish journalists could be persuaded to stop viewing everything through the lens of personalities, and "winning" and "losing." Legislation should not be a contest, with star players, color commentary, and betting on the point spread. Yeah, I know, I'm being unrealistic. But I think the tendency to characterize politics in this matter goes a long way to encouraging the behavior. Mr McConnell is already on record as defending his many changes of position over his career because he "likes to win." If that's all that matters and politics is a spectator sport, then all-in-all I'd rather watch curling.
-- Mal
3catwoman3
(23,987 posts)...is the proper terminology. Enough with all this amendment crap. Or, at least require that amendments be related to the substance of the bill.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)amendment to a trafficking bill.
Imagine some poor kid, maybe a child of 12, who is the victim of a trafficker who sells the child to an "employer" who rapes her and makes her pregnant. Imagine how that child feels about becoming the mother of the child of her rapist. If there is any argument for permitting abortion that should appeal to the most rigid of opponents to abortion, surely that is it. And I can tell you that such a thing has happened in the history of the world, probably many, many times.
Let each woman decide for herself. Let her choose. Let her be.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)divine intervention.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)To use religious terminology, rape is the work of the devil. It's, in the terminology of the very fundamentalist religious, satanic. Rape is satanic. There, I said it.
CatWoman
(79,302 posts)Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)...GOP spelunked again.
malaise
(268,998 posts)Harry scared the shite out of them