Skip to comments.
Senior Dem 'confident' Stupak amendment will be stripped
The Hill ^
| November 9, 2009
| By Michael O'Brien
Posted on 11/09/2009 9:29:40 AM PST by MaestroLC
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 next last
There's a sucker born every minute.
1
posted on
11/09/2009 9:29:42 AM PST
by
MaestroLC
To: MaestroLC
Hey, yellowdogs...got your Hope and Change right HERE.
2
posted on
11/09/2009 9:31:57 AM PST
by
50sDad
(The Left cannot understand life is not in a test tube. Raise taxes, & jobs go away.)
To: MaestroLC
There will be no conference report. The Senate will not pass any bill.
3
posted on
11/09/2009 9:31:57 AM PST
by
mwl8787
To: MaestroLC
Every single Democrat in the House needs to be booted out of office in 2010.
The lone Republican and any others who voted for this bill needs to be booted out of office in 2010.
They are totally out of control.
No money for abortions.
No money for illegals.
Serious restrictions on lawsuits regarding medical efforts.
The only ‘winners’ in this bill are the Tort Lawyers.
To: MaestroLC
"I am confident that when it comes back from the conference committee that that language won't be there," Wasserman Schultz said during an appearance on MSNBC. "And I think we're all going to be working very hard, particularly the pro-choice members, to make sure that's the case." And when that happens, most of the RATS who said the amendment had to be in there in order for them to vote Yes will still vote Yes.
5
posted on
11/09/2009 9:33:11 AM PST
by
Dahoser
(The missus and I joined the NRA. Who says Obama can't inspire conservatives?)
To: MaestroLC
I must be the dumbest guy on the block. Let me see. The House Bill wouldn’t have passed without the Abortion Amendment. So, Wasserman-Schultz says she is confident it will be stripped out in Conference with the Senate Bill (Which still has a long way to go). So, if it gets stripped out, what makes her think those pro-life Democrats will vote for it then when they wouldn’t vote for it unless it was in there last Saturday? Can anybody explain this to me?
To: Old Retired Army Guy
7
posted on
11/09/2009 9:36:19 AM PST
by
goodnesswins
(Become a Precinct Committee Person/Officer....in the GOP...or do NOT complain.)
To: Old Retired Army Guy
8
posted on
11/09/2009 9:36:33 AM PST
by
goodnesswins
(Become a Precinct Committee Person/Officer....in the GOP...or do NOT complain.)
To: MaestroLC
"The amendment, offered by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), won the support of
Republicans one stupid SOB RINO and some centrist Democrats in the House."
OK...
9
posted on
11/09/2009 9:36:50 AM PST
by
jessduntno
(TOTUS fails and POtuS becomes a phuttering stuck.)
To: MaestroLC
Stupak is just a useful idiot for the Dems.
To: MaestroLC
the Senate cant pass this nonsense. The result of this passing is just unimaginable .. i foresee another revolution if they force this crap on us.
11
posted on
11/09/2009 9:38:02 AM PST
by
eak3
To: MaestroLC
Debbie is a mindless robot and Nancy’s pet gerbil.
12
posted on
11/09/2009 9:38:02 AM PST
by
clintonh8r
(My country. Not my government.)
To: MaestroLC
She is a very slimy POS, even for a ‘rat.
To: Old Retired Army Guy
You’re right I don’t get how that works.
rep 1: Don’t count me in unless the pizza comes with pepperoni.
rep 2: OK, here’s our order with pepperoini
rep 1: cool, count me in!
senator: sorry, we’re taking out the pepperoni.
14
posted on
11/09/2009 9:38:44 AM PST
by
MNDude
(The Republican Congress Economy--1995-2007)
To: MaestroLC
That puts them on record.
15
posted on
11/09/2009 9:39:41 AM PST
by
listenhillary
(A "cult of personality" arises when a leader uses mass media creating idealized/heroic public image)
To: Paleo Conservative
"Stupak is just a useful idiot for the Dems." No, he's a calculating idiot, those voting for him are useful idiots.
16
posted on
11/09/2009 9:40:14 AM PST
by
WHBates
To: MaestroLC
Was there ever any doubt?
17
posted on
11/09/2009 9:42:04 AM PST
by
Rutles4Ever
(Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
To: MaestroLC
This was the problem of tying one's objections to this dog of a bill to that ONE issue. Once that was supposedly removed, those who had objected had nowhere to go. But their constituents, especially the truly pro-life ones could see through the charade of the Stupak amendment, even if the Blue Dogs couldn't or wouldn't.
If nothing else, the exchange between John Boehner and Charlie Rangel on the floor of the house on Friday should have been a wake up call. Boehner asked Rangel if the Democrats would guarantee that abortion funding wouldn't be put back IN the bill when it went to the Reconciliation Committee. Rangel essentially laughed in Boehner's face, and said NO, there were no guarantees. So the Blue Dogs and Joseph Cao, who got their 'assurances' with the Stupak Amendment, will get sold down the river when the bill gets to Reconciliation.
18
posted on
11/09/2009 9:44:51 AM PST
by
SuziQ
To: WHBates
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Stupak was just looking for an excuse to vote for this monstrosity.
To: MaestroLC
****There’s a sucker born every minute. ****
Not if they are aborted first!
Ok, that was cruel!
20
posted on
11/09/2009 9:47:26 AM PST
by
Ruy Dias de Bivar
(The sword does not kill. It is a tool in the killer's hand.---Lucius Annaeus Seneca)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-37 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