The champions of women, the dems, continue to block the anti-human trafficking bill

[koshergrl]

They love women so much...abortion has always been about human trafficking, and this proves it.

"...an important bill to curb the inhumane practice of human sex trafficking remains stalled in the United States Senate. That’s because Harry Reid’s minority caucus has mounted five filibusters to prevent debate on the legislation. Why? It’s hard to say, given that every single argument and excuse they’ve advanced has either been quietly abandoned, or fails basic factual scrutiny. But their underlying motive isn’t a mystery: They object to the bill’s inclusion of routine Hyde Amendment-style language that prevents public funds to pay for abortions, a longstanding precedent supported by a large majority of Americans. Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue. Several of the Senators who have joined the filibuster were original co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed out of committee without a single dissenting vote on either side.
Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

 

[koshergrl]

"...Who could be against the bill’s hallmark feature, the creation of a fund to benefit victims of domestic trafficking, financed by assessments on the traffickers themselves? But no. The bill got stopped in its tracks when Senate Democrats belatedly noticed that the victims’ fund would be covered by the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal money for abortions."

Time for the Senate to break the impasse over human trafficking bill - LA Times

 

[koshergrl]

And dems REALLY don't want this to happen:

"The bill would provide funds to assist victims and help them get restitution in some cases. It would also provide grants for anti-trafficking law enforcement units and funding for task forces to investigate child trafficking offenses."

Time for the Senate to break the impasse over human trafficking bill - LA Times

 

[koshergrl]

"Democrats know that ...a good number of their own members probably aren’t keen on voting in favor of taxpayer-funded abortions. Dick Durbin theatrically stated on the Senate floor that removing a single sentence from the legislation would clear the way for overwhelming passage. Mitch McConnell said, ‘okay, let’s vote to remove that single sentence,’ at which point Team Durbin objected and denied the chamber an opportunity to enact the precise change they were demanding."

Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

 

[Mr.Right]

"...Who could be against the bill’s hallmark feature, the creation of a fund to benefit victims of domestic trafficking, financed by assessments on the traffickers themselves? But no. The bill got stopped in its tracks when Senate Democrats belatedly noticed that the victims’ fund would be covered by the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal money for abortions."

Time for the Senate to break the impasse over human trafficking bill - LA Times

You mean they actually read the Bill? I'm flabbergasted!

 

[Katzndogz]

From the democrat point of view they are importing illiterate third worlders from central America and Africa. Something has to be done with them. No one would really miss them. Make a buck and sell them.

 

[Sonny Clark]

They love women so much...abortion has always been about human trafficking, and this proves it.

"...an important bill to curb the inhumane practice of human sex trafficking remains stalled in the United States Senate. That’s because Harry Reid’s minority caucus has mounted five filibusters to prevent debate on the legislation. Why? It’s hard to say, given that every single argument and excuse they’ve advanced has either been quietly abandoned, or fails basic factual scrutiny. But their underlying motive isn’t a mystery: They object to the bill’s inclusion of routine Hyde Amendment-style language that prevents public funds to pay for abortions, a longstanding precedent supported by a large majority of Americans. Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue. Several of the Senators who have joined the filibuster were original co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed out of committee without a single dissenting vote on either side.
Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

Simple solution. Remove the "abortion part" from the bill, then put it up for a vote. If the disagreement over abortion is stopping the show, then remove that past and see what happens when put to a vote. Is that complicated?

 

[Mr.Right]

They love women so much...abortion has always been about human trafficking, and this proves it.

"...an important bill to curb the inhumane practice of human sex trafficking remains stalled in the United States Senate. That’s because Harry Reid’s minority caucus has mounted five filibusters to prevent debate on the legislation. Why? It’s hard to say, given that every single argument and excuse they’ve advanced has either been quietly abandoned, or fails basic factual scrutiny. But their underlying motive isn’t a mystery: They object to the bill’s inclusion of routine Hyde Amendment-style language that prevents public funds to pay for abortions, a longstanding precedent supported by a large majority of Americans. Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue. Several of the Senators who have joined the filibuster were original co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed out of committee without a single dissenting vote on either side.
Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

Simple solution. Remove the "abortion part" from the bill, then put it up for a vote. If the disagreement over abortion is stopping the show, then remove that past and see what happens when put to a vote. Is that complicated?

You are making the mistake of believing that they actually ever think about doing the right thing. I thought you were smarter than that.

 

[koshergrl]

"...Who could be against the bill’s hallmark feature, the creation of a fund to benefit victims of domestic trafficking, financed by assessments on the traffickers themselves? But no. The bill got stopped in its tracks when Senate Democrats belatedly noticed that the victims’ fund would be covered by the restrictions of the Hyde Amendment, which forbids the use of federal money for abortions."

Time for the Senate to break the impasse over human trafficking bill - LA Times

You mean they actually read the Bill? I'm flabbergasted!

Actually, I'm not sure they did. Which explains why they initially supported it..then didn't.

Dems will never knowingly support anything which restricts people who live depraved lifestyles. They see women and children as chattel...and particularly poor women and children, as without any redeeming worth at all.

They historically vote for policies that demean women and children, and de-criminalize crimes against them. They balk at any sort of restriction or impediment to the sex trade, and refuse to approve any oversight whatever of the sex trade or abortion clinics. I'm not talking aggregious, interfering oversight. I'm talking about the basic type of oversight that prevents blatant abuses and exploitation..and death. They will never approve anything that protects women and children who are victimized sexually. Ever. They approve of the policies that do the exploiting.

 

[Sonny Clark]

They love women so much...abortion has always been about human trafficking, and this proves it.

"...an important bill to curb the inhumane practice of human sex trafficking remains stalled in the United States Senate. That’s because Harry Reid’s minority caucus has mounted five filibusters to prevent debate on the legislation. Why? It’s hard to say, given that every single argument and excuse they’ve advanced has either been quietly abandoned, or fails basic factual scrutiny. But their underlying motive isn’t a mystery: They object to the bill’s inclusion of routine Hyde Amendment-style language that prevents public funds to pay for abortions, a longstanding precedent supported by a large majority of Americans. Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue. Several of the Senators who have joined the filibuster were original co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed out of committee without a single dissenting vote on either side.
Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

Simple solution. Remove the "abortion part" from the bill, then put it up for a vote. If the disagreement over abortion is stopping the show, then remove that past and see what happens when put to a vote. Is that complicated?

You are making the mistake of believing that they actually ever think about doing the right thing. I thought you were smarter than that.

Well, obviously, you took me seriously. Hey, I'm very well aware of the game. I know how politics works.

 

[WinterBorn]

If the anti-trafficking bill is important, why won't the republicans remove the anti-abortion segment so the bill will pass?

 

[AmericanFirst]

They love women so much...abortion has always been about human trafficking, and this proves it.

"...an important bill to curb the inhumane practice of human sex trafficking remains stalled in the United States Senate. That’s because Harry Reid’s minority caucus has mounted five filibusters to prevent debate on the legislation. Why? It’s hard to say, given that every single argument and excuse they’ve advanced has either been quietly abandoned, or fails basic factual scrutiny. But their underlying motive isn’t a mystery: They object to the bill’s inclusion of routine Hyde Amendment-style language that prevents public funds to pay for abortions, a longstanding precedent supported by a large majority of Americans. Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue. Several of the Senators who have joined the filibuster were original co-sponsors of the legislation, which passed out of committee without a single dissenting vote on either side.
Friendly reminder Champions of women still obstructing anti-human trafficking bill over abortion funding Hot Air

I am so tired of that weasel Reid, first he can't do his job while majority leader, now he blocks votes, what a retarded idiot.

 

[Moonglow]

Normally,,for normal healthy people, this is called an impasse.......but go ahead and play guilt by association, it's just more toxic shame from angry people that are scared....

 

[WinterBorn]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

 

[koshergrl]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

 

[WinterBorn]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

And who wrote the bill? Because it would not be a stretch to think most liberals would not approve any bill with anti-abortion riders on it. This is a typical Washington tactic. You take a bill that is all about something everyone is behind, and then you stick in something completely unrelated that the opposition will not allow to pass. Like the recent fiasco with the republicans refusing to pass a bill on veteran's benefits. It was not the part about the veterans. It was the riders added that they disliked.

 

[koshergrl]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

And who wrote the bill? Because it would not be a stretch to think most liberals would not approve any bill with anti-abortion riders on it. This is a typical Washington tactic. You take a bill that is all about something everyone is behind, and then you stick in something completely unrelated that the opposition will not allow to pass. Like the recent fiasco with the republicans refusing to pass a bill on veteran's benefits. It was not the part about the veterans. It was the riders added that they disliked.

Cuz that matters more than helping victims of human trafficking.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, we all know that. So the Republicans did it.

 

[WinterBorn]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

And who wrote the bill? Because it would not be a stretch to think most liberals would not approve any bill with anti-abortion riders on it. This is a typical Washington tactic. You take a bill that is all about something everyone is behind, and then you stick in something completely unrelated that the opposition will not allow to pass. Like the recent fiasco with the republicans refusing to pass a bill on veteran's benefits. It was not the part about the veterans. It was the riders added that they disliked.

Cuz that matters more than helping victims of human trafficking.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, we all know that. So the Republicans did it.

Right. One party is completely evil and the other is a benevolent force for the good of all mankind. lol

 

[koshergrl]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

And who wrote the bill? Because it would not be a stretch to think most liberals would not approve any bill with anti-abortion riders on it. This is a typical Washington tactic. You take a bill that is all about something everyone is behind, and then you stick in something completely unrelated that the opposition will not allow to pass. Like the recent fiasco with the republicans refusing to pass a bill on veteran's benefits. It was not the part about the veterans. It was the riders added that they disliked.

Cuz that matters more than helping victims of human trafficking.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, we all know that. So the Republicans did it.

Right. One party is completely evil and the other is a benevolent force for the good of all mankind. lol

Way to attempt to derail, but I'm not interested in talking about that. I'm interested in sticking to the topic.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking. If you have evidence that at some point they have written a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, feel free to post that information. Otherwise, shut the fuck up, weirdo.

 

[WinterBorn]

Obviously the passage of the bill is not as important to either party as is the language about abortions.

Oh I see you missed this:

"Because the anti-trafficking bill fails to upend this settled issue, Democrats are blocking even a vote to begin formal debate on the issue."

You're welcome.

And who wrote the bill? Because it would not be a stretch to think most liberals would not approve any bill with anti-abortion riders on it. This is a typical Washington tactic. You take a bill that is all about something everyone is behind, and then you stick in something completely unrelated that the opposition will not allow to pass. Like the recent fiasco with the republicans refusing to pass a bill on veteran's benefits. It was not the part about the veterans. It was the riders added that they disliked.

Cuz that matters more than helping victims of human trafficking.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, we all know that. So the Republicans did it.

Right. One party is completely evil and the other is a benevolent force for the good of all mankind. lol

Way to attempt to derail, but I'm not interested in talking about that. I'm interested in sticking to the topic.

Dems would never write a bill that helps victims of human trafficking. If you have evidence that at some point they have written a bill that helps victims of human trafficking, feel free to post that information. Otherwise, shut the fuck up, weirdo.

Shut the fuck up? lmao Nope, sorry.

So little time and so many buttons to push.