Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

Menu

Subscriptions

Links

Recent Comments

Recent comments from all news stories on this site. Users must follow the site's moderation policy. Personal attacks, profanity, abusive conduct and expressions of prejudice are not allowed. If you want to retrieve a comment of yours that was recently deleted, visit your user page and click the Moderation link.

Project 2025's Distortion of a Reconstruction-Era Law Could Enact a National Abortion Ban
Remember, Adolph Hitler didn't clearly state "take all the Jews you find, gas them, then incinerate them."

Nope. You won't find those clear, exact words in any of Hitler's writings or speeches.

But just how did that turn out, eberly?

What does Project 2025 propose?
Project 2025 attempts to put "in one place a consensus view of how major federal agencies must be governed."

We cannot summarize all of its proposals, but here are some examples:

Abortion: Project 2025 describes the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, as "just the beginning."

"Conservatives in the states and in Washington, including in the next conservative Administration, should push as hard as possible to protect the unborn in every jurisdiction in America," the book states. "In particular, the next conservative President should work with Congress to enact the most robust protections for the unborn that Congress will support while deploying existing federal powers to protect innocent life and vigorously complying with statutory bans on the federal funding of abortion."

The book calls on the Department of Health and Human Services to protect "the health and well-being of all Americans," beginning at conception, and to end mandatory health insurance coverage of Ella, an emergency contraceptive that Project 2025 describes as a "potential abortifacient." It also advocates using an 1873 anti-vice law to block abortion pills from being sent via the mail. (More about that later.)

The book also calls for ending federal funding for "Planned Parenthood and all other abortion providers and redirect[ing] funding to health centers that provide real health care to women." As we have written before, Planned Parenthood provides more than abortion services. In its 2022-2023 annual report, Planned Parenthood said it provided 4.6 million tests and treatment for sexually transmitted infections, 2.25 million contraception services, 464,021 cancer screenings and prevention services (mostly breast exams and Pap tests), and 1.1 million pregnancy tests and prenatal services.

"Kamala wants to pass a law at the national level."

#110 | Posted by visitor_

It is called Roe v. Wade.

Besides, we covered this topic yesterday, you smooth-brained, mouth-breathing knuckle-dragger.

You're welcome.

Oh, and Happy Anniversary ! ! !

#110 | Posted by visitor_

We covered this topic yesterday, you smooth-brained, mouth-breathing knuckle-dragger.

You're welcome.

Oh, and Happy Anniversary ! ! !

#107 | Posted by visitor_

We covered this topic yesterday, you smooth-brained, mouth-breathing knuckle-dragger.

You're welcome.

Oh, and Happy Anniversary ! ! !

#8 | Posted by robson

Nothing quite like misogyny mixed with racism to help elect Kamala Harris POTUS.

"...he was all over the news and it was very positive" -

#4 | Posted by visitor_

Must have been the high the Kumquat Pol Pot got after talking about Arnold Palmer's junk.

Oh, and Happy Anniversary

"Kamala claims, without evidence, to have worked at McDonald's." -

#4 | Posted by visitor_

So?

Right out of high school, I worked at the McDonalds not too far from my home... for 2 weeks.

I worked there until the Clerk of the Courts hired me to work as an intern in his office that summer.

The McDonald's is no longer there.

But, even if it were still there, each McDonalds is owned by a franchisee, and the owner is under zero federal or state obligation to keep HR records for over 50 years.

Please provide conclusive proof that what I just said in this post is a lie.

Oh, and visitor_...

... Happy Anniversary ! ! !

"She touts a McDonalds job that she never had." -

#2 | Posted by robson at 2024-10-21 10:08 AM | Reply | Flag: How the --- do you know that?

Would Congress nonetheless defy the ECRA and act illegally? To reject a state's electoral votes would require a majority in each house of the newly elected Congress. No matter which party controls the House and Senate, its margin is expected to be thin. Sen. Susan Collins was the leader oncr the Republican side in the bipartisan Senate group that drafted the ECRA. Other Republicans in that group who will still be in the Senate in January 2025 include Lisa Murkowski, Todd Young, and Shelley Moore Capito. Let's assume for the sake of analysis Republicans control the House and have 51 or 52 Senators. It would still take only one or maybe two Republicans to abide by the terms of the ECRA that they themselves drafted to defeat any plot in Congress to steal the election.
Out of that group I would trust Murkowski to hold out. Not sure about the other 3. Speaking of trust, I posted this in another thread:
The second and only other basis on which the bipartisan Congress agreed it could lawfully object is also extremely limited. Congress can object if the document a governor sends in, identifying the electors, is defective in some way. Again, this provision does not give Congress the power to second guess the voting process in a state. Indeed, Sen. Ted Cruz voted against the Act precisely because it shut down Congress' power to do so.

The entire thrust of the ECRA is to emphasize that any disputes over the voting process are to be resolved in the courts, not in Congress.

Yes, the courts held in 2020, but will they in 2024? The SC will be the final arbitor, but I have no confidence that their rulings will be fair and impartial and won't favor Donald Trump.

1. I don't give a flying ---- about your hypocrisy.
2. You fully support politicians who deny abortions during the first trimester
3. You are ignorant as to what a heart beat law is.
en.wikipedia.org
4. The fact that you don't know what a heart beat law is (the law being a prominent part of the abortion discuss btw) proves you are an ignorant ---- who should keep his opinions to himself on a topic like abortion.

Note
Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable