[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani

Man puts down ABC's The View on air

Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka

My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But..

Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’

Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC

Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines

New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics,

BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk,

Douglas Macgregor - IT'S BEGUN - The People Are Rising Up!

Marine Sniper: They're Lying About Charlie Kirk's Death and They Know It!

Mike Johnson Holds 'Private Meeting' With Jewish Leaders, Pledges to Screen Out Anti-Israel GOP Candidates

Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!]

1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires.

Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed

Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!!

Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES

Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen

Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk

Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances

"NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

If You're Trying To Lose Weight But Gaining Belly Fat, Watch Insulin

Arabica Coffee Prices Soar As Analyst Warns of "Weather Disasters" Risk Denting Global Production

Candace Owens: : I Know What Happened at the Hamptons (Ackman confronted Charlie Kirk)

Illegal Alien Drunk Driver Mows Down, Kills 16-Year-Old Girl Who Rejected His Lewd Advances

STOP Drinking These 5 Coffees – They’re Quietly DESTROYING Your Gut & Hormones

This Works Better Than Ozempic for Belly Fat

Cinnamon reduces fat

How long do health influencers live? Episode 1 of 3.

'Armed Queers' Marxist Revolutionaries Under Investigation For Possible Foreknowledge Of Kirk's Assassination Plot


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Senate Passes Hate Bill! Yet Democrats Compromise
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://republicbroadcasting.org/?p=3196
Published: Jul 17, 2009
Author: Rev Ted Pike
Post Date: 2009-07-17 10:15:38 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 315
Comments: 27

Sen. Patrick Leahy’s hate crimes bill, amending the National Defense Authorization Act, effectively passed the Senate tonight at about eleven o’clock p.m. EDT. A call for cloture, or termination of debate after thirty hours, was passed 63 to 28. Clearly, the Senate majority had spoken. Once cloture is invoked there is usually little more that can be done to resist.

There was no floor debate. A complete end run had been done around adequate Senate hearings, a Mark-up session and Rules Committee debate. Total Senate debate of the hate bill amounted to little more than a brief “kangaroo” hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee several weeks ago. Witnesses, which included Attorney General Eric Holder were stacked 4 to 2 against conservatives.

Passage occurred despite massive protest from the Christian/conservative right (even more than yesterday) with only the very smallest percentage of calls today in favor of the hate bill.

Yet Protest Made a Difference

Earlier Thursday evening the Senate finally assembled a quorum and voted down, 62 to 29, Sen. Hatch’s amendment. It would require the federal government to conduct a study to determine if the states are not enforcing the law against violent hate crimes. Citing Attorney General Eric Holder’s recent testimony in Judiciary, Hatch confirmed that states are already “doing a good job.”

Then Senator Sam Brownback submitted an amendment which would include in the hate bill the most specific statement (part of the “Religious Freedom Act,” passed in 1993 by Congress 97-3) that only speech that threatens imminent incitement of violence will be punishable under the hate bill. Speech that falls short of such actual incitement will be protected.

Sen. Leahy earlier said he had no problem with inclusion of Brownback’s amendment. Although he voted against it, the amendment passed overwhelmingly 78-13. Approval of Brownback’s amendment is a great victory, testimony to the pressure put on liberals even in the past two days. Most Senate Democrats were clearly eager to mollify, to some degree, the overwhelming anger at the hate bill from their constituents this week. Their House counterparts, under far less pressure eleven weeks ago, would never have made such a concession.

Inclusion of Brownback’s amendment should help safeguard free speech from the pulpit or airwaves, except in the cases of the most blatant, immediate incitement to violence. It helps neutralize the extremely threatening language of the 1968 hate crimes law, Title 18, sec. 2A, which says if anyone “induces,” through speech, commission of a violent hate crime the speaker will be tried “as a principal” alongside the active offender in federal court.

S. 909 remains a massive invasion of state’s rights in law enforcement in violation of the 10th Amendment. It violates the 14th Amendment by exalting certain groups, including homosexual pedophiles, above the majority. But, thanks to massive pressure on liberal Senators, especially during the last two days, and the initiative of Sen. Brownback, at least the 1st Amendment may not be as imminently threatened as before.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 22.

#3. To: christine (#0)

Once again it took five Republicans to pass this just like Cap and Trade....no wonder they are fading fast as a party

robnoel  posted on  2009-07-17   10:32:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: robnoel (#3)

.no wonder they are fading fast as a party

Not true.

The republican party is as strong as ever

Its is ONE damned party rob, one party, one system, the ruling elite.

Americans refuse to accept that the system is stacked this way all for the edification of the sheep that think their vote makes a difference.

Cynicom  posted on  2009-07-17   10:45:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Cynicom (#5) (Edited)

Well then I guess we should start talking about America as one party political system....and drop all the pretence of a two party system.

Wikipedia

Sometimes the term de facto single-party state is used to describe a dominant-party system where laws or practices prevent the opposition from legally getting power. Some single party states only outlaw opposition parties, while allowing subordinate allied parties to exist as part of a permanent coalition such as a popular front. Within their own countries, dominant parties ruling over single-party states are often referred to simply as the Party. For example, in reference to the Soviet Union, the Party meant the Communist Party of the Soviet Union; in reference to the former People's Republic of Poland it referred to the Polish United Workers' Party.

A one-party system should not be confused with a non-partisan democracy which prohibits all political parties. Also, some one-party states may allow non-party members to run for legislative seats, as was the case with Taiwan's Tangwai movement in the 1970s and 1980s.

In most cases, single-party states have arisen from Leninist, fascist or nationalist ideologies, particularly in the wake of independence from colonial rule. One-party systems often arise from decolonization because one party has had an overwhelmingly dominant role in liberation or in independence struggles.

Where the ruling party subscribes to a form of Marxism-Leninism, the one-party state system is usually called a communist state, though such states do not use that term to describe themselves, adopting instead the title of people's republic, socialist republic or democratic republic.

robnoel  posted on  2009-07-17   10:49:49 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: robnoel (#8) (Edited)

Well then I guess we should start talking about America as one party political system....and drop all the pretence of a two party system.

Indeed we should.

The proof was there for all to see years ago, Americans ignored it at their own peril.

Two parties??? In 1952 ...both voting...parties offered Eisenhower the candidates position, no strings attached.

Harry Truman, a democrat, was pushed out by his own party, a sitting president mind you. After Bernard Baruch, a democrat, decided Ike should run as a republican, an unknown patsy was forced to run on the democrat ticket to ensure a win by Ike.

After that charade, anyone that still held the idea of a two party system was not only ignorant, but rather stupid. To add insult to injury, the same patsy was forced to run against Ike four years later.

Cynicom  posted on  2009-07-17   11:12:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Cynicom (#12)

After Bernard Baruch, a democrat, decided Ike should run as a republican, an unknown patsy was forced to run on the democrat ticket to ensure a win by Ike.

Just like William Kristol 'picked' Sarah Palin (unknown) to run along side Juan 'Amnesty' McCain, who had been polling consistently in last place in the GOP for 2007 and part of 2008???

X-15  posted on  2009-07-17   11:16:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: X-15 (#15)

Just like William Kristol 'picked' Sarah Palin (unknown) t

I have wondered who picked her and why. Do you recall any reference that it was Communist Kristol????

Cynicom  posted on  2009-07-17   11:24:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Cynicom (#18)

It's pretty much confirmed that it was Bill Kristol:

"It's no wonder why William the Bloody is defending Palin's decision to bail out. He's the one who pushed McCain big time to make her his VP.

Jane Mayer explains it all took place on a cruise in her piece: How John McCain came to pick Sarah Palin.

Palin received two memos from Paulette Simpson, the Alaska Federation of Republican Women leader, noting that two prominent conservative magazines—The Weekly Standard, owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, and National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, Jr.—were planning luxury cruises to Alaska in the summer of 2007, which would make stops in Juneau. Writers and editors from these publications had been enlisted to deliver lectures to politically minded vacationers. “The Governor was more than happy to meet these guys,” Joe Balash, a special staff assistant to Palin, recalled.

On June 18, 2007, the first group disembarked in Juneau from the Holland America Line’s M.S. Oosterdam, and went to the governor’s mansion, a white wooden Colonial house with six two-story columns, for lunch. The contingent featured three of The Weekly Standard ’s top writers: William Kristol, the magazine’s Washington-based editor, who is also an Op-Ed columnist for the Times and a regular commentator on “Fox News Sunday”; Fred Barnes, the magazine’s executive editor and the co-host of “The Beltway Boys,” a political talk show on Fox News; and Michael Gerson, the former chief speechwriter for President Bush and a Washington Post columnist."

Source: http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/bill-kristol-defends-sarah- palin-stepping

"As Scott Horton of Harper’s and The Daily Hell Demon has discovered, it was at the insistence of New York Times “lightning rod conservative” monkey Bill Kristol, a liar and a fraud, that the McCain campaign went with Sarah Palin, and now the campaign is pissed at Kristol for making them pick this unconscionable retard."

Source: http://wonkette.com/403588/mccain-campaign-hates-bill-kristol-for- making-them-put-dumb-lady-on-ticket/

X-15  posted on  2009-07-17   11:30:42 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: X-15 (#20)

The Weekly Weakly Standard

There. Fixed it.

James Deffenbach  posted on  2009-07-17   11:43:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 22.

        There are no replies to Comment # 22.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 22.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]