Missourian
Diamond Member
- Aug 30, 2008
- 34,912
- 25,713
That is what Democrats had to negotiate with. They would vote for the compromise. That is their only leverage.You’re really not good at this. From your own article:
“Simmons proposed a compromise — increasing penalties on an existing law that bans any person from obstructing roadways, instead of passing legislation specifically targeting protesters.
The change would increase the current punishment of $500 or six months in jail for blocking roadways to McMahan’s proposal of $1,500, a year in jail or both, with a minimum $500 fine and 25 days in jail.
The amended proposal was passed by committee members unanimously and will now go on to the full Senate.”
It was passed unanimously, you dope. According to your article, both sides were in favor of increasing the penalty for blocking roadways.
I always find it hilarious when you guys accidentally prove the exact opposite of what you’re trying to show lol.
Your ignorance of the mechanics of lawmaking is absolutely staggering. Is there any part of the political process that you DO understand?
Or is this more of the time tested strategy of manufactured ignorance to avoid the obvious truth?
Either way, it's asinine.
There is no avoiding the fact that the left defended blocking roadways as a form of protest right up until it was used against them. Tying yourself into whatever pretzel shape you care to won't improve your position. Your attempts to gaslight with revisionist history will 100% fail.
Last edited: