Biggest-Geek-Ever
Member
This is going to blow up.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
TX State Senator leads 11 hour filibuster that successfully beats anti-abortion bill
- Thread starter ivysaur12
- Start date
- Status
Yes, in a special legislative session. The question is quite specific.
Abortion is one of the issues where there's no clear "for" or "against" - people's responses to the question fall into buckets like the following -
"totally against in all cases"
"against, except in certain cases"
"totally for"
"for, but with certain restrictions"
etc etc.
I would argue that given Texas' political makeup, there's more people that lean at least slightly pro-life than pro-choice when the numbers are tallied, and I think it reflects in the legislature as well.
Sorry, but I'm not trolling. Unless the definition of "trolling" has become "disagreeing with the popular opinion on GAF". I definitely haven't been malicious about it, nor have I even told you how I feel about this issue. Mostly just taking issue with assertions of importance, what Texans are like, and a bunch of other things that I think are misconceptions or mischaracterizations in this thread.
Shit, most of my posts were laughing at the circus along with the rest of you.
I don't know, do you think they will? Who's going to stop them?
Supposedly a bigger pic:
I went to the Texas website. It was legit.
Frankenstrat
Member
Here's hoping for some answers by the time I wake up. Best of luck to you all.
Edit: Holy fuck, confirmed. What the shit. Will pay very close attention to this tomorrow.
Edit: Holy fuck, confirmed. What the shit. Will pay very close attention to this tomorrow.
If they try, this is going to bite them harder in the ass. 180,000 people.
Ignoring the Senate rules (not the 30 day stuff) has nothing to do with being a democracy. They're just procedural rules adopted by the majority in the first place. As happened throughout the night, any violations can be appealed but they're voted on by the body and the majority would rather pass the bill than respect their rules. There isn't really any violation of principles here either -- the body is meant to be majority rules. You can argue improprieties in the actual voting (eg the senate wasn't in session), but you won't get anywhere arguing that it shouldn't have been brought to a vote. If anything, preventing a vote is the anti-democratic (not synonymous with wrong) option
e: I think it is bullshit that they violated the rules, but I don't think it is has anything to do with being democratic
I question the realism of the photo as its missing everything above the actions line and the picture is not cropped so there should be a lot more text.
Black Mamba
Member
I don't recall a single post of Enron's so if he's trolling me, it's because I don't recognize him.
eBay Huckster
Member
And I would argue that given that the answers to the previous four questions in the same poll would indicate a majority leaning against SB5 even outside of the special session, your argument is exceedingly unlikely to be practically true.
I'd be shocked if this doesn't get some national play tomorrow.
It was listed at 6/26 about ten minutes ago, when I checked
This couldn't have gone any better for the Democrats. The bill was (is?) going to pass no matter what. Maybe not yesterday, but soon. Filibuster was a move to drum up debate and support. Now, with the craziness of the last hour, the chanting of the crowd, and the ambiguity of the result, there's enough news fodder for weeks.
Brawndo Addict
Banned
Yes, that's why they had the sentence about the bill not having majority support (51% in opposition). For whatever reason I didn't read that as an independent sentence and mistakenly read that as being associated with the 80%, which I mistakenly did again when I reread it to try to prove a majority opposed it.
I'm in a position to help that. I can't leave yet.
After CNN basically got off free for their bullshit after the Boston bombing, there is no incentive to confirm your story before putting it out there.
wait what? Does that mean they tried to manually changed the date?
PotatoeMasher
Member
Supreme Court rules on DOMA tomorrow.
I am Michael Bolton
Banned
Just do a search if you're interested (you're probably not) and you'll find the same type of behavior in other threads dealing with political issues.
Ugh, I really hope it does. This is actual news and needs attention.
Black Mamba
Member
Changing the date might be breaking the law? lolz if true.
Officerrob
Banned
I've had reasonable conversations with him before, although admittedly, his relatively consistent position that the ethics of a law are irrelevant as long as it exists is a little discomfiting to me. But given that slightly alarming position I don't think his posts here are particularly out of character.
Biggest-Geek-Ever
Member
Wow. This is such a farce. Trying to tell as many as I can about this.
cr_blah_blah
Member
Apparently everybody has their hands on these from the looks of things
I hate to be the wet blanket, but the TLO site changing the date isn't as damning and incriminating as it seems. It just means the guy updating the site changed some details.
That's all.
The official logs aren't uploaded yet.
What they write now is sort of meaningless until then.
That's all.
The official logs aren't uploaded yet.
What they write now is sort of meaningless until then.
Unknown Soldier
Member
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/chris...gn=t.co&utm_source=10021075&utm_medium=social
Witnessing history in the making as it is streamed in real time from someone's mobile phone is pretty amazing. Watson seems to have finished his speech and left though.
Witnessing history in the making as it is streamed in real time from someone's mobile phone is pretty amazing. Watson seems to have finished his speech and left though.
Apparently everybody has their hands on these from the looks of things
What the fuck is going on...
Yep. I guess I gave the GOP players in this too much credit when thinking they would pull the bill in the delay before letting Watson close, because they could have attempted to push it through again after this session.
Now they're going to get unbelievably worse attention with the same result. Fucking comedy, but I don't know why I expected anything else really.
ClassyPenguin
Banned
This needs to be a trending meme. Put that data to use.
I have no idea if a vote occured during all of that ruckus or not, but that doesn't really tell us anything other than when it was put into the computer. None of us know for sure if there was some sort of special rule invoked that allows for voting during chaos like that, if Texas law allows for votes after the session if something is invoked, etc. We don't even know who has the final say when things like this happen. Most of us watching the stream don't even know what happened in the last 20 minutes period. At this point its a he said/she said on twitter between state senators who obviously cannot be trusted
Black Mamba
Member
.
LAWL
I think this bears repeating. I went to the actual page myself. The 6/26 dates were listed on the official website.
Officerrob
Banned
Fuck that "behind closed doors" garbage. Make them come out and sell this line of bullshit
Depends on what the rulings will be.
Bingo.
But he'll ignore that. Not because he's a troll, but because people always look to confirm their preconceived beliefs. Just because his beliefs happen to be pretty damn inconvenient right now does not mean that he's any more likely to change them.
Those printouts aren't from the website. Regardless, the incriminating and damning part would be that we all saw them vote after midnight
Welcome to democracy, where things are decided for you without you knowing.
So, if senators are being asked to caucus to sort it out, at least we know the Republican majority isn't just going to lie and ram it through. Also confirms that the Senate has no procedure in place for something like this (although after tonight I'll bet they will)
Unknown Soldier
Member
I'm trying to imagine a scenario in which the Supreme Court notices what is happening in Texas and decides to delay their rulings a day.
- Status