Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, September 13, 2022

Lindsey Graham's anti-abortion legislation once unified the Republican Party. The 15-week abortion ban he pitched Tuesday had the exact opposite effect.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Lady G's idea just lost the GOP a couple of House seats all on its own.

#1 | Posted by Zed at 2022-09-13 04:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

He's just trying to gin up the Base so they'll back him when he goes to trial.

Not that that would help.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2022-09-13 05:02 PM | Reply

The GOP is the dog that is always chasing the car, and now has its jaws sunk into the back tire, and it has no idea what it's supposed to do next.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-13 05:04 PM | Reply

has its jaws sunk into the back tire, and it has no idea what it's supposed to do next.

Spin? :-)

#4 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-09-13 05:09 PM | Reply

Adam Serwer
@AdamSerwer

The talking point will be that a 15 week abortion cutoff is "just like europe" but unless it subsidizes abortion, makes it easy to get one before 15 weeks and offers broad exemptions after, and makes abortion more accessible it is not actually like Europe
twitter.com

The Myth That America's Abortion Laws Are More Permissive Than Europe's

By making a false comparison, GOP apparatchiks hope to cushion the political fallout of Roe's demise.
www.theatlantic.com

#5 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2022-09-13 05:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

I'd like to make a point here on the Dobbs decision that I think remains vastly overlooked. SCOTUS absolutely DID NOT ban abortion in the Dobbs decision. What they did was rule that women only have bodily authority over their own bodies if the local state legislature decides that it is OK for them to have that bodily control.

Now that decision did say that not all rights that Americans enjoy must be spelled out in law or in the constitution. But that they are only entitled to such rights if those rights were traditionally there at the start of our nation. They then went on to point out that because women didn't have those rights at the beginning of this nation*, that they cannot argue that they get it today automatically.

They only can get it today if their local government says they can get it.

This is so much worse a conclusion than what I see written in the media.

* - mainly because it was in the hands of their husbands back then.

#6 | Posted by prius04 at 2022-09-13 05:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"They then went on to point out that because women didn't have those rights at the beginning of this nation*"

They did, though.
Abortion was legal in every State when the nation was founded.

But I understand what you are saying with that asterisk.
I'm just re-iterating how deep the GOP lies go on this one.

#7 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-13 05:46 PM | Reply

Not only was it legal, but it was legal up until the baby's movement was felt, which is 28 to 32 weeks.

#8 | Posted by Corky at 2022-09-13 06:06 PM | Reply

Closeted gay man wants to tell women what they can do with their bodies. The GOP really has their finger on the pulse of women voters.

#9 | Posted by censored at 2022-09-13 06:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

In Lindsey's defense, keeping his legs spread never resulted in his pregnancy.

He should propose a bill demanding more ------ in America.

Lead by example Lindsey!

#10 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-13 06:41 PM | Reply

I dont think there should be a national abortion ban. I think it should be left to the states.

But if they do go down that road, I think it should be done at a convention of the states. Put it before the states and see if it can be put into the constitution.

#11 | Posted by boaz at 2022-09-13 06:50 PM | Reply

I dont think there should be a national abortion ban. I think it should be left to the states.

#11 | Posted by boaz

Then i guess you'll have to stop voting for the party who will enact a national ban if they get enough power.

#12 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-13 06:58 PM | Reply

Rand Paul Doesn't Seem Too Keen on Lindsey Graham's Federal Abortion Ban: 'Sort This Out at the State Level'
www.mediaite.com

#13 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 07:20 PM | Reply

Then i guess you'll have to stop voting for the party who will enact a national ban if they get enough power.
#12 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I'll take a wild guess and say that BOAZ is not a single issue voter, let alone one focusing on women's rights.

#14 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 07:22 PM | Reply

I'll take a wild guess and say that BOAZ is not a single issue voter...

Boaz would vote for Hillary Clinton if she switched parties and was the nominee.

#15 | Posted by REDIAL at 2022-09-13 07:26 PM | Reply

Any reason why 15 weeks? So abortion at 16 weeks is murder but at 14 weeks it's not?

Who's setting the legal definition of murder these days? And why is it determination based on fetuses?

#16 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 07:28 PM | Reply

16

15 weeks is the significant line where 96% of abortions occur. Voluntary abortions on demand have pretty much happened by 15 weeks. After that, they're primarily for other reasons that are addressed with exceptions.

It inconveniences abortions seekers the least.

#17 | Posted by eberly at 2022-09-13 07:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The theocrats that republicans are trying to please think abortion is murder at any point after -----------. Unless they're willing to ostracize those voters, who they desperately need, they'll never stop working toward a nationwide ban.

#18 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2022-09-13 07:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#17 | POSTED BY EBERLY

So it's not murder at 16 weeks?

#19 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 07:45 PM | Reply

Joe Biden has been warning people that if the Republicans gain control of Congress that one of the first things that they'll do is impose a nationwide restriction on abortions.

And now Lindsey Graham is making Biden's case for him...

And yet Republicans are wondering why their November prospects have been looking less rosy than a year ago.

OCU

#20 | Posted by OCUser at 2022-09-13 07:45 PM | Reply

-So it's not murder at 16 weeks?

it doesn't fit the definition of murder any time, I think.

But, if passed, it would be a crime if not for the exceptions.

#21 | Posted by eberly at 2022-09-13 07:47 PM | Reply

#21 | POSTED BY EBERLY

murder = the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

So, fetuses being human and all, a doctor (human) aborting a fetus (premeditated killing) at 16 weeks (illegal under this bill) would technically be murder, no?

#22 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 07:57 PM | Reply

22

I don't know. I don't think it's going to be considered murder.

a crime...but not murder. If they are going to call a fetus a human being then I can't imagine how they can draw a line at 15 weeks.

so, it's unlikely they are going to use the word, "murder".

if you want to keep calling it that, be my guest. your choice

#23 | Posted by eberly at 2022-09-13 08:06 PM | Reply

It inconveniences abortions seekers the least.
#17 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Sure thing, Eberly.
The "inconvenience" after 15 weeks is often death.
But that's not much of an inconvenience, when you belong to the GOP Death Cult.

#24 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-13 08:11 PM | Reply

Eberly probably meant it inconveniences the fewest number of abortion seekers. Since most abortions happen before 15 weeks.

Still. Calling death, or never being able to have children, an "inconvenience?"
Republicans still just don't get it, not even one tiny little bit.

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-13 08:16 PM | Reply

your choice
#23 | POSTED BY EBERLY

Not MY argument, just pro-lifers insisting millions upon millions of babies have been murdered over decades in America. Doing my best to perceive their logic, which is difficult in the actual legal and medical sense.

#26 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-09-13 08:32 PM | Reply

"Doing my best to perceive their logic,"

Good luck with that.

#27 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-09-14 10:58 AM | Reply

15 weeks is the significant line where 96% of abortions occur. Voluntary abortions on demand have pretty much happened by 15 weeks. After that, they're primarily for other reasons that are addressed with exceptions.

The thing is, Graham's proposal doesn't require states to allow abortion up to 15 weeks and doesn't require them to have exceptions. It simply says - abortion after 15 weeks is not allowed.

If it were really a nationwide 15 week rule, and had every exception under the sun, i think you'd see at least a bit more support for it. But that's not what it is, at all.

#28 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-14 11:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Also, Politico is really doing a lot of ideological laundering for Republicans by claiming they're "stunned" by this. Graham has been sponsoring bills like this one every Congress for several years.
www.govtrack.us

#29 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-14 11:19 AM | Reply

#28. Joe

Keep in mind that this is just a proposal and it's not going anywhere. For it to become a Senate bill it would go through a sausage making process and if the House were to take it up it would go through even more sausage making and then even further in joint committee before it would even make it to the president's desk. I understand your primary objection and actually agree with you on that point. But this thing is a LONG way from even entering the legislative process.

#30 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-09-14 11:38 AM | Reply

#30 I realize it's going nowhere, but it changes the discourse and we need to be honest about what it actually is.

#31 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-14 11:57 AM | Reply

I wonder if this is Graham trying to make a play at what he thinks will be a majority leader position.

#32 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-14 12:03 PM | Reply

Keep in mind that this is just a proposal and it's not going anywhere.

That coupled with his "rogue" action on this is what leads me to believe he's making a power play.

He has no illusions that it won't become law. It's just him throwing red meat to the rabid anti-abortion crowd to drum up support for being the top dog.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2022-09-14 12:04 PM | Reply

But this thing is a LONG way from even entering the legislative process.
#30 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

^
JeffJ is a graduate of the "Don't Look Up" school of political forecasting.

#34 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-14 12:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It's his M.O.

Pretend the horrendous bills republicans are pushing aren't feasible.

Defend the horrendous bills Republicans turn into laws.

Rinse repeat.

I remember when he was applauding Republicans during the Trump administration for overturning environmental regulations.

Apparently the moron still doesn't believe in climate change and felt Democrats have over stepped in trying to protect the environment.

#35 | Posted by ClownShack at 2022-09-14 12:19 PM | Reply

But this thing is a LONG way from even entering the legislative process.
#30 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

We know what a trail balloon is.

But so was overturning Roe v Wade as you all just loved to tell us over and over.

Until it happened.

#36 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-09-14 12:35 PM | Reply

"Trial balloon".

#37 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-09-14 12:36 PM | Reply

Apparently the moron still doesn't believe in climate change and felt Democrats have over stepped in trying to protect the environment.
#35 | POSTED BY CLOWNSHACK

For decades, they said CO2 isn't a pollutant.
Zatoichi told them to go breathe in 1% CO2 and get back to us.
They never did, possibly because they're smart enough to know breathing in 1% CO2 will kill them. But it's not pollution!

#38 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-14 12:45 PM | Reply

There are pregnant women who would make better Senators than Lady Graham.

Heck this one would.

www.youtube.com

#39 | Posted by Tor at 2022-09-14 01:04 PM | Reply

Zatoichi told them to go breathe in 1% CO2 and get back to us.

God i miss that guy. RIP.

#40 | Posted by JOE at 2022-09-14 02:55 PM | Reply

Reposting from another forum:

Why do people have abortions later in pregnancy?

Non-Medical Reasons: Individuals seek abortions later in pregnancy for a number of reasons. As part of the Turnaway study out of the University of California San Francisco, from 2008-2010 over 440 women were asked about why they experienced delays in obtaining abortion care, if any (Figure 2). Almost half of individuals who obtained an abortion after 20 weeks did not suspect they were pregnant until later in pregnancy, and other barriers to care included lack of information about where to access an abortion, transportation difficulties, lack of insurance coverage and inability to pay for the procedure. This is unsurprising, given abortions can be cost-prohibitive for many; in a study from 2011-2012, the median cost of a surgical abortion at 10 weeks was $495, jumping to $1,350 at 20 weeks (range $750-$5,000) excluding the cost of travel and lost wages. Yet the Federal Reserve Board found 40% of U.S. adults do not have enough in savings to pay for a $400 emergency expense, meaning many individuals may need to delay having an abortion until they can raise the necessary funds.

Fetal Anomalies: Individuals also seek abortions later in pregnancy due to medical reasons. With medical advances, many genetic fetal anomalies can be detected early in pregnancy; for example, chorionic villus sampling can diagnose Down Syndrome or cystic fibrosis as earlier as 10 weeks gestation. Structural fetal anomalies, however, are often detected much later in pregnancy. As part of routine care, a fetal anatomy scan is performed around 20 weeks, which entails ultrasound imaging of all the developing organs. Many structural anomalies are discovered at this time that would not have been apparent previously. A proportion of these are lethal fetal anomalies, meaning that the fetus will almost certainly die before or shortly after birth, meaning the fetus may be nonviable.2 In these cases, many individuals wish to terminate their pregnancies, rather than carrying the pregnancy until the fetus or newborn passes away. Very often these pregnancies are desired, making this decision exceedingly difficult for parents. Inadequate data exist to know how many abortions later in pregnancy occur due to fetal anomalies, but a study by Washington University Hospital showed almost all women whose fetuses had lethal fetal anomalies chose to terminate their pregnancies. www.kff.org

#41 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2022-09-14 04:55 PM | Reply

Laws being made by people with no understanding of the biology of pregnancy...

#42 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2022-09-14 04:57 PM | Reply

"Almost half of individuals who obtained an abortion after 20 weeks did not suspect they were pregnant until later in pregnancy"

^
Yeah, but only Republicans know those ----- are lying.

#43 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-09-14 06:06 PM | Reply

But this thing is a LONG way from even entering the legislative process.

Pence said today whoever represents the GOP in the 2024 general will support a national ban.

Strong words...........

#44 | Posted by brass30 at 2022-09-15 02:33 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2022 World Readable

Drudge Retort