AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Free Dating
search My Threads  

Main    General Talk   

Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats


Dec 2, 2010 @ 11:57 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
Monday, Retiring Congressman Steve Buyer(R) from Indiana, was trying to get a bill stopped that hadn't gone through the proper procedures to bring to the house floor. The Chairman for the House Committee for Veterans Affairs Bill Filner(D) from California had tried to get a vote and pass a bill that would allow elective abortions in and at Veterans Hospitals. Another way to get the Federal Government to pay for abortions using Federal money and Federal faculties. Another hidden agenda the Obama administration is trying to force on American people to accept regardless of the circumstances. Yet the Liberal Democrats wonder why they run into so much resistance.
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 2, 2010 @ 4:33 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Suthn_Man


Posts: 11,239
The Chairman for the House Committee for Veterans Affairs Bill Filner(D) from California

Hmmm.. No wonder the VA is reportedly so screwed up!! Its committee is run by a raving Pelosi affiliate!!

post reply view Suthn_Man's threads
Dec 2, 2010 @ 4:45 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Nightowl001


Posts: 12,273
You could use that spin for a wind tunnel!
HR 5953, the “Women Veterans Bill of Rights,” contains language would establish a list of 24 rights for women veterans of the armed services to be “displayed prominently and conspicuously in each facility of the Department of Veterans Affairs and distributed widely to women veterans.”

The rights women veterans “should have” according to HR 5953 include the rights to health care and health care providers. Although that sounds innocuous, one pro-life source on Capitol Hill told LifeNews.com this morning that the rights “could then be used as a basis to require funding for abortion and access to abortion at veterans facilities” in much the same way ObamaCare contained little or no prevention of abortion funding.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) does not currently do abortions and abortions are currently excluded from the VA health benefits package, because abortion is excluded from the scope of “general reproductive health care” under the law that guides the department.

“But that exclusion does not extend a prohibition to other authorities created by earlier or later legislation,” the pro-life source explained, and “this bill could lay the groundwork and legal precedent for the VA to provide abortions in the future.”
Women Veterans' Bill Of Rights

post reply view Nightowl001's threads
Dec 2, 2010 @ 6:22 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
this bill could lay the groundwork and legal precedent for the VA to provide abortions in the future.”

That's what Buyer called attention to and was trying to stop. Filner was back dooring the bill. And with the acting Speaker of the House Democratic Rep. Laura Richardson of California, was trying to avoid Buyer from bring it out. And we all know how honest that lady is.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-h1sprbND28&feature=related
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 2, 2010 @ 6:42 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
SweetNapaGuy


Posts: 10,951
So...

As the old joke guys, every guy should be locked up for rape. After all, the groundwork has been laid (i.e., they have penises), so they're obviously going to do it anyway...

Right?

Can we save the hysteria until something is actually up for a vote that has the right language?
post reply view SweetNapaGuy's threads
Dec 2, 2010 @ 11:36 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
gypsy29


Posts: 1,965
A vote???? Don't you mean a filibuster????
post reply view gypsy29's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 1:15 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Angel54214


Posts: 22,374
Here's the video...

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/retiring-congressman-steve-buyer-loses-cool-house-floor-12270147
post reply view Angel54214's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 7:35 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Gallows_Humor


Posts: 16,779
dirty dealings...?? more like a republican temper tantrum gone south....



Suspension of the Rules
Suspension of the rules is used to provide expedited consideration of relatively noncontroversial legislation. It is the most commonly used method for raising measures for consideration. Between two-thirds and three-quarters of measures that became public laws in recent Congresses have been considered by this method.

The procedure for suspension of the rules is spelled out in House Rule XV, clause
1. Under this rule, the Speaker may recognize a Member to move to suspend the rules and pass a particular measure on Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and the last six days of a session. There is no requirement limiting suspension motions to measures reported from committees. A suspension motion may be debated for 40 minutes (equally divided between a proponent and opponent); may not be amended from the floor (although the motion itself may include changes to the measure); and must pass by a two-thirds vote of those present and voting.

The suspension procedure effectively waives all rules of the House that would prevent consideration of a measure, so that no points of order may be made against the measure on the House floor.

Unlike other special days, the suspension procedure is not designed to grant limited
privilege to a specific class of legislation or empower the House to circumvent a
recalcitrant committee or leadership.

The Speaker’s authority with regard to suspension motions is not limited by the rules of the House. Party rules, however, establish boundaries that the Speaker is generally expected to observe. The rules of the Republican Conference (and previously of the Democratic Caucus) direct the Speaker not to recognize Members to move to suspend the rules for measures that would involve more than $100 million. In the 109th Congress, Republican Conference rules further provided that the Speaker should not schedule any bill for consideration under the suspension procedure that does not include a cost estimate, has not been cleared by the minority, or is opposed by more than one-third of a reporting committee’s members, unless the rule is waived by
a majority of the party’s elected leadership.


seems to me that it is a good thing he is retiring....

all this bill would do is put up a few signs.... and nothing more....

post reply view Gallows_Humor's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 9:08 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Loreli


Posts: 31,995
by Steven Ertelt | Washington, DC | LifeNews.com | 12/1/10 5:22 PM

The House of Representatives passed, on a voice vote Tuesday night, the Women Veterans Bill of Rights but not before pro-life lawmakers were able to attach an amendment to it to make it abortion neutral.

Pro-life lawmakers and groups have been concerned the rights enumerated in the bill could be used to declare a right to abortion and abortion treatment through the VA.

Lawmakers added a new section that ensures nothing in the bill can be construed to establish a right to certain services listed as exclusions, which includes abortion and in-vitro fertilization.

The bill approved by the House contains new language requested by Rep. Chris Smith, the chairman of the Congressional Pro-Life Caucus, which ensures nothing in the bill can be construed to establish a right to abortion.

Smith applauded pro-abortion Rep. Filner who included the abortion exemption at the request of pro-life lawmakers.

“I am especially pleased that Chairman Filner’s bill—H.R. 5953—makes absolutely clear that abortion is not health care under this bill and so-called abortion rights are not implied by any of the rights specified in the legislation,” Smith said on the House floor.

“In addition to eliminating any legal grounds for implying a right to abortion access, abortion funding or any other abortion-related activity, the newly added Section 4 also neutralizes any legal effort to use the Women Veterans Bill of Rights as a basis to infer a right to other controversial services such as abortion counseling,” Smith added.

Seems a matter of language, not backdooring, or using the VA
post reply view Loreli's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 9:13 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Nightowl001


Posts: 12,273
Heaven forbid we should make sure VA healthcare is provided for our women veterans because there is no specific provision in the bill that would prevent them in perpetuity from obtaining an abortion from a provider paid with a tax dollar.

And heaven forbid, too, that insurance provided by the government should pay outright for a procedure that is legal but frowned upon by RTLers. (A procedure, I might point out, that would cost vastly less than prenatal, perinatal and postnatal care for a female vetetern, not to mention supporting a military dependent for any period of time.)
post reply view Nightowl001's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 9:18 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Gallows_Humor


Posts: 16,779
but where there is a will.. there is a way... cash can open many doors...



as procedures go...



a boob job costs more.....


post reply view Gallows_Humor's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 4:04 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
Seems a matter of language, not backdooring, or using the VA [/QUOTE
[QUOTE]The House of Representatives passed, on a voice vote Tuesday night,
Yea after attention was brought about it MONDAY!!!!

And it was backdooring and YES it was trying to allow the VA for the procedures. I doubled checked it today when I went up for my appointment for my surgery. It's still the big buzz there..
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 4:13 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
Heaven forbid we should make sure VA healthcare is provided for our women veterans

WTF do you know about VA and it's guidelines? What you read???? And yea NO WAY should any FEDERAL MONEY ever pay for abortions. YOU want it paid for dig it out of your LIBERAL pocket and pay for it. I don't give a chit whether you like it or not. It ain't gonna happen at any Veterans Affairs Hospital.

So stick with something you know about. Which is just about nothing.

And referencing Heaven from someone who doesn't believe is really funny. Kinda like who's an atheist thank after getting a good BJ...

And don't come back at me like you're some kinda expert on the VA. I will break your ever LIBERAL lovin heart..

And that goes double for you too Loreil.. Just because your a female it not a concern with VA Benefits applying to abortions. Or VA allowing abortions. Keep your fight for the Roe vs Wade campaign...
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 4:27 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Loreli


Posts: 31,995
I'm not fighting shit, tough guy.
Show me in my post where I stuck up for abortions.
The language as original may have allowed-period.
It was NOT TRYING TO GET ABORTIONS passed.
(My Dad was a Vet, my cousin is a VA nurse.

Your "holier than thou" doesn't impress or scare me.
post reply view Loreli's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 4:50 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
It was NOT TRYING TO GET ABORTIONS passed.
The Chairman for the House Committee for Veterans Affairs Bill Filner(D) from California had tried to get a vote and pass a bill that would allow elective abortions in and at Veterans Hospitals.
Looks like it says pass to me? Take off dem thar Liberal eye glass's and read what it says.
It was NOT TRYING TO GET ABORTIONS passed
Pro-life lawmakers and groups have been concerned the rights enumerated in the bill could be used to declare a right to abortion and abortion treatment through the VA.
WTF does that say??? Happy Halloween?

Lawmakers added a new section that ensures nothing in the bill can be construed to establish a right to certain services listed as exclusions, which includes abortion and in-vitro fertilization
Now what part of this is not plain to you that it was after the fact of being brought to light on MONDAY.. OMG...
My Dad was a Vet, my cousin is a VA nurse.

OMG the family expert....
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 10:33 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Angel54214


Posts: 22,374
I'm presenting what would clear up "confusion" on the VA woman's rights bill H.R. 5953 on abortions and gender alterations (nonapproved by the FDA) of funded taxpayer money.

The original language of the bill did not excluded these 2 provisions abortions & gender alterations, which the "VA Medical Package" does exclude (38 C.F.R. 17.38, section 3 (c). ):
(c) In addition to the care specifically excluded from the “medical benefits package” under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the “medical benefits package” does not include the following:

(1) Abortions and abortion counseling.

(2) In vitro fertilization.
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title38/38-1.0.1.1.19.0.170.10.html


The National Right to Life Committee sent a letter to the H.R. members on 11/29/10 urging them NOT to vote on the present bill:
http://www.lifenews.com/2010/11/29/nat-6893/

The bill was then revised by adding Section 4 to insure no override would be in allowance for the 2 provisions:
http://www.lifenews.com/2010/11/30/nat-6900/

H.R. 5953 revised after Section 4 was added and passed the House voice vote:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-5953
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-5953

Section 4:
SEC. 4. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN SERVICES.

Nothing in this Act shall be construed to establish a right to any service excluded under 38 CFR 17.38, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

Which balances with the "VA Medical Package" exclusions of abortions & gender alterations in section 3 (c).
post reply view Angel54214's threads
Dec 3, 2010 @ 10:56 PM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Gallows_Humor


Posts: 16,779
some people better rethink this... as...

if there is no language in the new bill.... allowing it ..( specifically overruling the old... with the new.)....... it cannot happen...and.. especially since there already is language excluding it... you are whistling dixie without a paddle.....

get a life. techie....
post reply view Gallows_Humor's threads
Dec 4, 2010 @ 1:50 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
techead


Posts: 2,383
some people better rethink this... as...

if there is no language in the new bill.... allowing it ..( specifically overruling the old... with the new.)....... it cannot happen...and.. especially since there already is language excluding it... you are whistling dixie without a paddle.....

The bill on MONDAY had the language to allow alective abortions at the VA .
Pro-life lawmakers and groups have been concerned the rights enumerated in the bill could be used to declare a right to abortion and abortion treatment through the VA.

See the word "rights"?????

On Tuesday the language was change by adding an amendment to asure there would be no abortions preformed at the VA Hospitals under the word "RIGHTS" any where. Understand now???
post reply view techead's threads
Dec 4, 2010 @ 2:26 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
Nightowl001


Posts: 12,273
I understand that our female veterans expressly no longer have the rights of private citizens in their healthcare choices. I happen to think that was a pretty stupid move, because it opens the doors for the courts to get involved.
post reply view Nightowl001's threads
Dec 4, 2010 @ 3:06 AM Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats    
southernlass


Posts: 5,489
and heaven forbid, too, that insurance provided by the government should pay outright for a procedure that is legal but frowned upon by RTLers. (A procedure, I might point out, that would cost vastly less than prenatal, perinatal and postnatal care for a female vetetern, not to mention supporting a military dependent for any period of time.)

My... a procedure, eh? Nice way to distance yourself from supporting and defending the murder of unborn children. Again, I don't know how the left makes this right in their minds. They claim to be anti-war, anti-killing, anti-death penalty but they are just fine with the "procedure" that kills babies sleeping unsuspectingly in their mother's wombs.

Well, actually, Owl, that would be "procedure(s)" plural, as there are some particularly gruesome ways of murdering these children that you might want to bone up on, since you're a avid supporter of abortion procedure, apparently.

Always one for consistency in valuing human life, eh, Owl? Not.



[I apologize if I'm a little intense, but I'm extremely passionate about this issue and am not able to be "politically correct" about the murder of the tiniest, innocent human beings in this country. And no, the government doesn't need to be paying for it nor do we, the taxpayers.]
post reply view southernlass' threads
Main    General Talk    Dirty Dealings, and backroom Democrats

free adult dating | mission statement | testimonials | safety warning | report abuse | safe list | privacy | legal | advertise | link to us

© Copyright 2000-2014 Online Singles, LLC.
OS-WEB02