Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Senate rejects UN treaty for disabled rights in 61-38 vote [View all]heaven05
(18,124 posts)45. mean spirited
Last edited Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:56 PM - Edit history (1)
seems cut and dry. yea or nay. all this bullshit rethug excuse about worrying about a "creeping" 'one world' government being implemented by the voting in of this measure show just how much religion has warped the minds of the human beings in the right wing of our government. Conservatives my ass, snakes is more like it. Their nay vote is truly disgusting. But steph miller is talking about it, so is msnbc, so maybe this will be another nail to be able to send them to a whig graveyard, soon. And they just walked past bob dole. disgraceful. I am truly incensed being partially disabled myself.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
82 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The GOP cuts Social Security, Healthcare and Human Rights every chance they can
freshwest
Dec 2012
#20
There must be a roll call vote report somewhere, but I can't find it yet
struggle4progress
Dec 2012
#39
Politic Averse posted a link to all the names above. By name, state and it shows the party.
freshwest
Dec 2012
#65
Sad but unsurprising. Our side was totally disinterested in this treaty while the RW crowd had
Mass
Dec 2012
#9
I totally agree. I meant usual people who promote the causes of Democratic activists
Mass
Dec 2012
#14
I can see where you would be angry at Dems since you only got 100% of the Dem vote.
ieoeja
Dec 2012
#21
Congratulations, repukes. Thanks to you, we are still behind Sudan and Syria on this issue.
KamaAina
Dec 2012
#13
Yes, but doesn't the treaty set a policy that the US has been following for 2 decades already? n/t
hughee99
Dec 2012
#24
Am I misreading this, or does it say that the treaty require signatories to comply with standards
hughee99
Dec 2012
#18
NAILED. it. - Whipping the Senate into shape for Rand Paul's Pledge of Allegiance to the NRA. nt
patrice
Dec 2012
#52
"Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) argued the treaty would infringe on U.S. sovereignty.."
pampango
Dec 2012
#66
Even Bob Dole, fresh out of the hospital, couldn't convince the heartless, obstructionist GOP
Adenoid_Hynkel
Dec 2012
#38
Such a disheartening, pointless vote. Kudos to Kerry, Dole and Langevin on their personal and
pinto
Dec 2012
#41
2014 will be here before you know it.Vote the free-loading GOP obstructionists OUT of office asap!
judesedit
Dec 2012
#43
Yep, sooo human-like, kick around those that need help, are disabled and disadvantaged in this
RKP5637
Dec 2012
#53
Explain to me again why we are supposed to rush to compromise with these creatures.
Bluenorthwest
Dec 2012
#61
Sen Inhofe is worried that this body would force the US to do things we might not want.
rhett o rick
Dec 2012
#62
... The treaty is based on existing U.S. law. Its advocates argue convincingly that nothing
struggle4progress
Dec 2012
#74