RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Consideration Being Given To Officially Recognize Crying Babies In The - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Consideration Being Given To Officially Recognize Crying Babies In The Senate Chamber Rate Topic: -----

#61 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 12,924
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 19 April 2018 - 07:04 PM

View Postzurg, on 19 April 2018 - 03:14 PM, said:

I don't have a problem with giving her permission to do this for voting times.

However, it's obviously opportunistic grandstanding. If she'd been given that permission pretty quietly, she'd accepted it graciously, and no headlines were written, it would be a non-issue. She's being an obnoxious selfish politically driven bitch.



This is a rule change that had to be voted on by the entire senate.
0

#62 User is offline   Magic Rat 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 5,682
  • Joined: 12-April 04

Posted 19 April 2018 - 07:19 PM

View PostLadybird, on 19 April 2018 - 07:00 PM, said:

She demanded? She proposed a rule change and it was voted on, just like any other proposal.
https://slate.com/ne...floor-vote.html

" Duckworth submitted the resolution, which would allow senators to bring children younger than 1 year old onto the floor during votes. During her pregnancy, Duckworth said she was concerned that some of the Senate rules would prevent her from being able to vote while breastfeeding her baby. She could not hand the baby off to someone on her staff, and the Senate does not allow voting by proxy. Senators are often on the floor for a long time for votes. Budget or health care bill vote-a-ramas, for example, can go on for many hours. "


The change is small, it's time has come.


All that quote proves is that the whole thing was political posturing by a cynical, self serving, narcissistic attention pig who is only too willing to use her child for adoration from leftist idiots who think she is sincerely that incompetent but at the same time someone who should be considered a 'strong' woman. This makes her a selfish bitch, a typical politician and a lousy mother. Hell, I'm almost convinced that the only reason she didn't have the baby killed is because she can score political points for awhile.

The change means <censored>. It's cynical, symbolic crap and nothing more.

ETA: You don't seem to understand that this is about character of Duckworth, not the useless Senate rule. Do I strike you as someone who would give any <censored>s for Senate rules?

This post has been edited by Magic Rat: 19 April 2018 - 07:27 PM

0

#63 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 12,924
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 19 April 2018 - 07:28 PM

View PostMagic Rat, on 19 April 2018 - 07:19 PM, said:

All that quote proves is that the whole thing was political posturing by a cynical, self serving, narcissistic attention pig who is only too willing to use her child for adoration from leftist idiots who think she is sincerely that incompetent but at the same time someone who should be considered a 'strong' woman. This makes her a selfish bitch, a typical politician and a lousy mother. Hell, I'm almost convinced that the only reason she didn't have the baby killed is because she can score political points for awhile.

The change means <censored>. It's cynical, symbolic crap and nothing more..


She's a double amputee who served this country honorably. Heck yeah she's a strong woman. Why shouldn't propose a change that she has directly experienced to make it easier for future senators who may give birth in office.

All of this nastiness is purely your partisan opinion.
0

#64 User is offline   Magic Rat 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 5,682
  • Joined: 12-April 04

Posted 19 April 2018 - 07:37 PM

View PostLadybird, on 19 April 2018 - 07:28 PM, said:

She's a double amputee who served this country honorably. Heck yeah she's a strong woman. Why shouldn't propose a change that she has directly experienced to make it easier for future senators who may give birth in office.

All of this nastiness is purely your partisan opinion.


Her military record holds no water with me. Military service doesn't excuse anyone from being weak, a moron, a rotten person, a racist, a jerk or even a selfish attention whore.

I know all kinds of veterans and many disabled ones, (Being one myself, we tend to connect.) So I am less than impressed with your worthless attempt to whine about any criticism of her cynical, selfish nature.

It has nothing to do with partisanship. I hate ALL politicians and have made that crystal clear my entire history of posting at RN. The 'nastiness' comes from my seeing her motivations and finding them pathetic.

This post has been edited by Magic Rat: 19 April 2018 - 07:42 PM

0

#65 User is offline   Ben Cranklin 

  • Satiric Curmudgeon
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 5,613
  • Joined: 27-June 03

Posted 19 April 2018 - 07:42 PM

For those of you arguing this is a rule change for just one, single, solitary entitled person...Schmuck Schumer--among others of his party--is now considering identifying as a woman of child-bearing age and having a fertilized egg implanted into his stomach so that a C-section and nine months from now he can also get in on the spectacular visual of being able to clutch a newborn to his bosom as he defiantly (if rather shamelessly) mom-splains at his political opponents on the floor of the Senate with some Nth degree righteous faux-dignation.

This post has been edited by Ben Cranklin: 19 April 2018 - 07:48 PM

0

#66 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 49,495
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 20 April 2018 - 12:08 AM

View PostBen Cranklin, on 19 April 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

For those of you arguing this is a rule change for just one, single, solitary entitled person...Schmuck Schumer--among others of his party--is now considering identifying as a woman of child-bearing age and having a fertilized egg implanted into his stomach so that a C-section and nine months from now he can also get in on the spectacular visual of being able to clutch a newborn to his bosom as he defiantly (if rather shamelessly) mom-splains at his political opponents on the floor of the Senate with some Nth degree righteous faux-dignation.


:lol:

:2up:
0

#67 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 25,623
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 20 April 2018 - 05:22 AM

View PostLadybird, on 19 April 2018 - 07:03 PM, said:

Why, when there is a simpler and cheaper solution?

And ew.


Paraphrasing your statement in another thread, milk is milk.
0

#68 User is offline   Ticked@TinselTown 

  • Unimpressed with Celebutards since Always
  • View blog
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 25,623
  • Joined: 01-April 03

Posted 20 April 2018 - 05:24 AM

View PostLadybird, on 19 April 2018 - 07:28 PM, said:

She's a double amputee who served this country honorably. Heck yeah she's a strong woman. Why shouldn't propose a change that she has directly experienced to make it easier for future senators who may give birth in office.

All of this nastiness is purely your partisan opinion.


Typical hubristic horseshidt.
0

#69 User is offline   cobalt-blue 

  • Member of the RN Curmudgeon's Brotherhood. Get off my lawn
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 10,124
  • Joined: 10-July 03

Posted 20 April 2018 - 06:50 AM

View PostBen Cranklin, on 19 April 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

For those of you arguing this is a rule change for just one, single, solitary entitled person...Schmuck Schumer--among others of his party--is now considering identifying as a woman of child-bearing age and having a fertilized egg implanted into his stomach so that a C-section and nine months from now he can also get in on the spectacular visual of being able to clutch a newborn to his bosom as he defiantly (if rather shamelessly) mom-splains at his political opponents on the floor of the Senate with some Nth degree righteous faux-dignation.

:biglaugh: Sidesplitting!
0

#70 User is offline   oki 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 22,688
  • Joined: 14-October 04

Posted 23 April 2018 - 11:16 AM

View PostMagic Rat, on 19 April 2018 - 07:37 PM, said:

Her military record holds no water with me. Military service doesn't excuse anyone from being weak, a moron, a rotten person, a racist, a jerk or even a selfish attention whore.

I know all kinds of veterans and many disabled ones, (Being one myself, we tend to connect.) So I am less than impressed with your worthless attempt to whine about any criticism of her cynical, selfish nature.

It has nothing to do with partisanship. I hate ALL politicians and have made that crystal clear my entire history of posting at RN. The 'nastiness' comes from my seeing her motivations and finding them pathetic.


Exactly. She is already receiving or at least entitled a number of things for her service that she rightfully earned. Plus, this has absolutely nothing to do with her status as a vet or an amputee. This is someone whose own statements prove her to think that she deserves special treatment because she believes that having a child should entitle her to special treatment.

Oki

View PostBen Cranklin, on 19 April 2018 - 07:42 PM, said:

For those of you arguing this is a rule change for just one, single, solitary entitled person...Schmuck Schumer--among others of his party--is now considering identifying as a woman of child-bearing age and having a fertilized egg implanted into his stomach so that a C-section and nine months from now he can also get in on the spectacular visual of being able to clutch a newborn to his bosom as he defiantly (if rather shamelessly) mom-splains at his political opponents on the floor of the Senate with some Nth degree righteous faux-dignation.



Oh so very true.

Oki
0

#71 User is offline   RedSoloCup 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,586
  • Joined: 05-June 15

Posted 23 April 2018 - 11:24 AM

View PostLiz, on 18 April 2018 - 02:32 AM, said:

Consideration Being Given To Officially Recognize Crying Babies In The Senate Chamber

Diogenes' Middle Finger
Tuesday, April 17, 2018

Excerpt:

The present Congressional Democrats have proven to be useless muttering whiners, obsessed with non- existent scandals instead of addressing serious needs facing the country. They also like to try and move the goal post or change the rules just for themselves in the middle of the game.

In this latest example, it's pure privilege being showcased. Illinois Senator Tammy Duckworth is the ultimate token for the Dems, she's Asian born, a women, (sic) and she is a military veteran who lost both of her legs in combat while serving in Iraq. Unfortunately, she is constantly trotted out by the Democrats as a show of how much that they care about the military and the troops. They donít. But Duckworth has assumed a key role as the dems attack dog every time the left wants to slam Donald Trumpís lack of service or on issues involving the military, and has been applauded for nicknaming the POTUS ďcadet bone spursĒ.

According to Politico, Duckworth, who just a few days ago became the first sitting senator to pop out a baby while in office (top that Chuck Schumer) has gone to great lengths calling for the Senate to change the rules and submitted a resolution tailored just for her so that she can bring her newborn onto the Senate floor during votes. Itís cynical as hell to say it, but I will, it's hard to see how the infant isnít going to be more of a prop to elevate her national profile in the media because Democrats have proven to be very adept at exploiting children for political gain. There is no way that the Senate wonít vote to allow babies on the floor. Just imagine the amount of fiery social media hell that will be brought down on anyone who dares to say no.

*snip*

https://farm1.staticflickr.com/880/39724840310_fc93fcf170.jpg

The Rest


I unfortunately live in Illinois. No doubt Boss Madigan and Turbin Durbin put Duckwart up to this. After all this legless wonder is a proud Madigan puppet.

View PostMagic Rat, on 19 April 2018 - 07:37 PM, said:

Her military record holds no water with me. Military service doesn't excuse anyone from being weak, a moron, a rotten person, a racist, a jerk or even a selfish attention whore.

I know all kinds of veterans and many disabled ones, (Being one myself, we tend to connect.) So I am less than impressed with your worthless attempt to whine about any criticism of her cynical, selfish nature.

It has nothing to do with partisanship. I hate ALL politicians and have made that crystal clear my entire history of posting at RN. The 'nastiness' comes from my seeing her motivations and finding them pathetic.


:exactly:
0

Share this topic:


  • 4 Pages +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users