This is a long time in coming. And is desperately needed.
Liberals think that passing more laws stop criminal behavior?
M-man thinks that doing as little as possible stops criminal behavior?
harry knows he could get it through the house if it was about domestic vilence,
but the dems have added too much superfluous stuff to it, so the house will
reject it. then senate dems can falsely proclaim that repubs are anti-women.
Dems are more concerned about playing their political games than they are about
helping their constituents and are thereby further endangering women in abusive
lost, how about listing those "superflous" (sic) things?
Put anything in the bill that fits, then change the title to the "Violence
Against Men Act". That will line up the votes of all but a tiny number of
GOP House members right there.
Old man,It’s called the “Violence Against Women Act”The House would not go along with Senate provisions that single out
gays, lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders for protection and give tribal
authorities more power to prosecute non-Indians who attack Indian partners on
tribal lands.By loading all that extra junk, the senate is showing
they care more about playing politics than reauthorizing the 1994 Act. If they
wanted the 1994 Act reauthorized, they would have not added with language they
knew the house would reject.But you knew what I was talking about
all along.Congratulations on not repeating DNC or MSNBC hate speech
– first comment I’ve seen from you in a while that has been devoid