Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

GOP Retracts Report Dems Call Slanderous

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:32 PM
Original message
GOP Retracts Report Dems Call Slanderous
GOP Retracts Report Dems Call Slanderous
By JIM ABRAMS, Associated Press Writer

Thursday, May 5, 2005


(05-05) 13:14 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) --


After a week of Democratic protests, Republicans agreed on Thursday to change a report that had said the Democrats' amendments to an abortion bill could assist sexual predators.


Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said in a floor speech that the changes made to the House Judiciary Committee report were "a tacit acknowledgment of the inaccuracy and untruthfulness of the original report."


He commended the committee chairman, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., for the change and said he hoped that, "with this correction of the slanderous report language, this unfortunate chapter can be brought to a close."


The dispute involved a bill, passed by the House last week, that would criminalize the transporting of a minor across state lines to get an abortion.

more...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/05/05/national/w131456D79.DTL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Beetwasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good!!
If only this story were publicized more so people would see what utter scum the Repubs are...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. But he said he was not offered an apology enen though it was changed
saw him talking on cspan this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neuvocat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Of course they wouldn't apologize.
The pukes were already too pissed off as it was (and they deserved it too).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kainah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
10. and they refused to consider
the motion on 'privileges of the House' that Conyers filed on Tuesday to ask that they change the language. They voted that down (actually, they voted to table the motion -- same thing) and now, quietly, change the language. Disgusting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mitchtv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. too complicated for most
stick to runaway bride/michael Jackson
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melodybe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. call and demand coverage
Here are the viewer comment lines, ask them to cover the implications of the New Freedom Commission while your at it:
ABC News: 212 456 7777

CBS News: 212 975 4321

Fox News: 212 301 3000

NBC News: 212 664 4444

MSNBC News: 201 583 5000

CNBC: 201 735 2622

United Press International: 202 898 8000

PBS: 703 739 5000

Washinton Post: 202 334 6000

NPR: 202 513 2000

Newsweek: 212 445 4000

LA Times: 216 237 5000

Time: 212 522 1212

New York Times: 212 556 1234

Associated Press: 212 621 1500

USA Today: 703 854 3400

Reuters: 646 223 4000

Wall Street Journal: 212 416 2000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
callous taoboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
2. So many "unfortunate chapters" to be closed, so little time n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:45 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. it is the openness (like this visible change in wording) that is so gallin
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. it is an AP story so should get some coverage
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
8. I'm still not clear on this "exemption" stuff.
Why would anyone want to exempt ANY sexual predator from prosection???

So does this mean that it's okay for a relative to doodle the kid???

What the fuck is this bullshit?:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kainah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. exemption for other relatives
The intent was to allow other relatives -- an aunt, a grandparent, etc. -- to take the minor over state lines to get the abortion. It had nothing to do with protecting the predator who caused the pregnancy. The repugs claimed the amendments were 'badly written' and so it would protect a relative who had gotten the minor pregnant. Obviously, that's probably possible but the amendments were absolutely never intended to protect predators, just to allow family members other than parents -- who are probably more often the predators -- to help the minor child.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Now I understand, but
Edited on Thu May-05-05 05:48 PM by Megahurtz
the Repukes are being stupid, because with their bogus parent notification law if a father or step-father was the sexual predator and the daughter became pregnant, the father/step father could force the daughter to have the child!
Or if it was the grandfather was the perpetrator the father could co-conspire to force her to have the child - whatever. Or maybe an uncle etc.

It could be tricky either way.:shrug:

There should be no parental notification law period.

Most of the time prosecuting these guys is next to impossible anyway, if the perpetrator is a family member.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 05:57 PM
Response to Original message
13. They're doing this garbage on the state level too.
Edited on Thu May-05-05 05:59 PM by cornermouse
Putting lies into the public record.

"Republicans agreed on Thursday to change a report that had said the Democrats' amendments to an abortion bill could assist sexual predators."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-06-05 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Nice phrasing. Making it sound like Repukes "cleaned it up".
Edited on Fri May-06-05 02:52 AM by Carolab
Sooooo typical. Still, I was glad to see it happen today.

I personally rang up Sensebrenner's office when this came to attention on DU and raised hell about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
14. They can't unring a bell.
Edited on Thu May-05-05 06:11 PM by TahitiNut
It's Rovian. Throw the shit on the wall and walk away saying "sorry." Rinse. Repeat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enki23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-05-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. except, with respect to the first metaphor, they don't rinse. just repeat
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC