over the last 14 months, the dems could have pushed thru congress a bill to give abortion rights to women, even if it might be somewhat limited. they had both chambers and the WH. they could have done a single issue simple piece of legislation. but instead they blew the moment on trying to do a massive christmas wish list. ... i want this and this and this and this, and this....
now they have to worry about whether a court might undo something important to liberals.
they tried to reach too far, and instead they might fall off the cliff.
that was supposed to be NTR
if it goes back to the states women will have exactly that....limited abortions......most states will land somewhere around 15 weeks
"that was supposed to be NTR"
What about the fetus/aborted baby trading market?
Ahhhh, actually there is such a thing )-:
And the story below is easier to connect to than it would have been a year ago because we all feel connected to the events in Ukraine this year.
Racketeers pay Ukraine women to sell foetuses to quack clinics for £10,000 courses of 'anti-ageing' jabs
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/apr/17/ukraine.russia
Aborted foetuses from girls and young women are being exported from Ukraine for use in illegal beauty treatments costing thousands of pounds, The Observer can reveal.
The foetuses are cryogenically frozen and sold to clinics offering 'youth injections', claiming to rejuvenate skin and cure a raft of diseases.
It is thought that women in the former Soviet republic are being paid £100 a time to persuade them to have abortions and allow their foetuses to be used in treatments. Most of the foetuses are sold in Russia for up to £5,000 each. Some are paid extra to have abortions late in their pregnancy.
Border guards stopped a train entering Russia from Ukraine last week and arrested a 'mule' carrying 25 frozen foetuses hidden in two vacuum flasks. The man said he had bought them from a medical research centre.
Ukrainian law allows an aborted human foetus to be passed to research institutes if the woman involved consents and her anonymity is protected. But police say staff at state health institutions are selling them to private clinics offering illegal therapy.
'It is extremely difficult to detect this because there are corrupt agreements between respected doctors and academics,' said one senior officer.
Beauty salons in Moscow that buy the aborted material to provide 'foetal therapy' are flourishing, despite a Russian ban on all commercial treatments using human cells other than bone marrow. The salons offer injections of stem cells, the undivided cells present in embryos that can adapt into any kind of tissue, although they are still at the trial stage worldwide.
Sergei Shorobogatko, a former Kiev policeman who is investigating the trade, said abortion clinics in the poor eastern regions of Donetsk and Kharkiv are selling foetuses - often untested for viruses such as Aids - without permission.
Abortions performed more than 12 weeks into a pregnancy are restricted in Ukraine. Older foetuses fetch extra because their curative powers are thought to be greater.
'When a doctor wants a foetus [to sell], he tells a girl there is a medical reason for an abortion later than 12 weeks,' said Shorobogatko. 'A special procedure extracts it with the placenta.'
The woman would be paid to wait until a late stage of her pregnancy, or might never even know she was duped, he said. Her aborted foetus would be passed to a middle-man or institution, which would cut it into separate organs before placing these in storage. The material was then sold and taken abroad.
Beauty courses of injections using blends of foetal cells are banned in Ukraine and Russia, but they are widely available in salons that charge up to £10,000. Wealthy clients are told the treatment can stop the ageing process, or eliminate such debilitating conditions as Parkinson's disease or Alzheimer's. One fashionable Moscow clinic approached by The Observer promised to 'take 10 years off your face'.
'We are talking about a huge, corrupt and dangerous trade in quack therapies,' said Professor Vladimir Smirnov, director of the city's Institute of Experimental Cardiology. Outside state institutes, Russian law allows only extraction and storage of human cells, but enforcement is lax.
Earlier this month the Ministry of Health announced that 37 out of 41 clinics offering stem-cell treatments in Moscow were acting illegally. Yet most continue to operate. 'What is unclear is what people are injected with,' said Dr Stephen Minger, of King's College, London. 'Are they really stem cells or a mixture of tissues?'
Ukrainians, accustomed to tales of illegal privatisations and government corruption, are not surprised. 'They used to say we were selling Ukraine,' said one reporter. 'Now we are selling Ukrainians; moreover, in parts.'
The bullish abandoned baby is a type of candlestick pattern that is used by traders to signal a reversal of a downtrend. It forms in a downtrend and is composed of three price bars. The first is a large down candle, followed by a doji candle that gaps below the first candle. The next candle opens higher than the doji and moves aggressively to the upside.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/BullishAbandonedBaby-2948e066cbbd4d8c8f44cbaeca17c61f.JPG)
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/dotdash_INV_final_Bullish_Abandoned_Baby_Jan_2021-01-c4ebdaafcc304337af922886d0416b66.jpg)
OK, enough of the funny business.
With regards to your point, bear.
The dems still have the White House and both houses of Congress right now and for several more months........no difference than a year ago.
I'm confused on why they blew their chance.
They know they'd never get the votes. Abortion isn't as popular as they want us to believe, and many of the dems would fear the voters were they to cast a vote in favor of an unpopular bill.
This is the case for much of the dem agenda, which is why a liberal supreme court is so important to them. Much easier to get legislation through judicial activism. And the unelected judges have a life time appointment. This is why we are again hearing discussion of stacking the court.
Ever notice how democrats seem to really hate the democratic process? Kinda ironic, huh?
I know they would never get the votes but it would have been the same 1 year ago is my point.
Thought I would explain a bit about our abortion laws etc.
Abortion is legal in Canada
The problem is funding is lacking thus a barrier to many poor people
It is the same old, same old story
If you can afford high price gas, abortion etc, then you have no worries
If you are watching the budget, then some things are not available as choices have to be made as to what goods and services one can afford
I know they would never get the votes but it would have been the same 1 year ago is my point.
So we're sorta in agreement here MM. Not sure why you wanted to affirm that. But I'll go a few steps further and say they could have codified abortion dozens of times in the last 50 or so years. They chose not to for all the obvious reasons.
They need a liberal SCOTUS to get these types of laws passed. They don't have one, and won't have one for a few decades. And the reaction was/is predictable.
But, the voting population is finally getting sick of it. I hope that does not change.
Tim,
I was commenting to bear, who seems to think a year ago, something was different than it is now as also noted in the title of this thread started by him.
With all due respect, the Dems didn't blow anything.
You need 60 votes in the senate (never going to happen in my lifetime) to pass legislation except when it comes to passing it through reconciliation, which only requires 50 votes plus the tie breaking VP vote. But reconciliation only pertains to budgetary issues and with certain restrictions.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/02/05/what-is-reconciliation-in-congress/
As for the "wish list", a term used by the GOP for any Dem spending bill, it never happened. So the US is still dead last in child care among 1st world nations. Yet, the propaganda the GOP uses that all this spending caused the inflation seems to stick. To the extent that the spending did cause the inflation I would suggest that it was Under Trump /McConnell/Pelosi and not Biden. But even more than all that "free" pandemic money was the Fed creating trillions out of thin air.
The notion that the GOP is fiscally responsible is laughable.
The notion that the GOP is fiscally responsible is laughable.
I wish I could argue with this. Unfortunately, we both know I can't. I can go out on a limb and make a potentially valid argument that the pubs are somewhat less fiscally wreckless than dems, but what's the point?
Re: Inflation, I disagree with saddling the previous admin, but i've already made that argument. The stimulus spending by both sowed the seeds, but the catalyst was and is energy. And the energy issue is supply related, and Joe owns that.
Agree that joj makes some solid points.
With regards to the current energy policy.....yes, the worst in history by a very wide margin but not responsible for much of the current situation.
Obama actually got it started with his war on fossil fuels, especially coal that has had tons of time to shutter many dozens of coal plants with many more to close down this decade, if not almost all of them.........which Biden is helping to put in the final nails in the coffin
Shutting down the pipeline too and discouraging investment in fossil fuels but its not had enough time to mess up current production..........which will be responding to these current prices with an unusually long lag time because of the anti fossil fuel policies.
Also agree with joj that the dems never had the 60 votes needed to do anything about this with legislation.
That the dems did not have the 60 votes is nearly moot.
Even with strong majorities, there was dissention in their ranks among dems from more moderate districts. You'd pass any form of abortion all day long in California and probably New York too, but not so much in W. Va.
The bottom line, abortion is simply not as "popular" as they would like us to believe, and Biden's effort to "codify" some form of abortion though legislation is very likely to fail, even before November.
So if the dems had 60 votes, you don’t think they would pass something with that power? or am I not understanding your poin?
I'm not saying it very well. Let me try a little differently.
If the dems had a super majority in the house and senate, I still doubt all their members would vote for a very liberal abortion law. They might get something with severe limitations that would fall very short of the rhetoric we see from the left today
The reps and senators from California would feel pretty confident, probably New York as well. But not so from places like West Virginia.
And that's just one more argument in support of leaving abortion debates (And many others for that matter) at the state level.
That makes sense but since each party often votes for THEIR agenda on divisive issues and the other party votes AGAINST it.......
They would likely try to pass something. In fact, even without 60 votes now, they want to vote anyway.