Bark!
Letting this go to the Senate is not good at all. They're afraid to go against this government. I hope it will be killed in committee.
I remember all the people who said "the Liberals are too corrupt" and "Harper can't do anything with a minority."
Idiots.
RB - Committee. Whoever. As long as someone kills it.
Harper voted in favour, of course -- maybe it's just my eternally sunshiny optimism, but I view that as a positive sign... he must be pretty sure it won't survive if he'd take the chance of looking like an extremist anti-choice nut. If he's pretty sure it'll go away anyway, he's got nothing to lose and socon votes to gain by voting for it.
I really am disgusted with the Liberals that voted for it, though. If there was ever a chance of me voting Liberal, it evaporated as I watched those assholes stand up, one after another. Fuckers and suckbags, every one of them.
Dion hisownself was AWOL. Not present.
Serving notice, M.Dion: Your ass is grass.
Only 13 Liberals supported the anti-marriage motion. I really wasn't expecting this at all. I was confident it would be killed at this vote.
Oooh, RB is surprised by misogyny.
Fish don't see the water, eh?
fern hill - I was thinking about spoiling my next ballot anyway (not that I usually vote liberal in the first place, but I might consider it if they showed any cojones for defending womens' rights).
Oh well... onto Part Two.
RB - Yeah so was I. I thought the same nuts who voted against equal marriage would vote for this piece of shit, but it wouldn't be enough to make the difference. ie. If only 13 had voted in favour of c-484, it would have been killed (by about 1 or 2 votes).
And that fucking Dion not showing up. Mtoherfuck!!! Asswipe!! Dickhead!!!
is there a list of the yeas and nays anywhere yet? Miss Vicky has some butts to start kicking.
Delurking yet again. I'm with Miss Vicky. WHO voted for this abomination! This only adds fuel to SHPM's determination to make it a triple E senate. If they turn back this abomination, it's one more arrow in his quiver to insist that the senate, rather than being the house of sober second thought, does not represent the public. Of course, the public does not support this bill, but what does SHPM care about the public?
GAAAAH! I'm getting too old for this. I should be more worried about the CPP, which is next on his list to gut, right after the EI surplus. Shades of Conrad Black and all that (I believe that Black was one of his mentors?) Back to lurking.
Count me in with Miss V. also.
.
I'm not entirely sure that the public KNOWS that this is what the bill is about - especially since the poll they are fond of quoting actually leads with "There have been five pregnant women murdered in Canada in the past three years, the most recent being Aysun Sesen, 25, of Toronto."
That and disingenuously referring to the bill as the "Unborn Victims of Violence Act" doesn't entirely spell out the plan.
Speaking of which, we should no longer refer to it as that instead using the formal name " An Act to amend the Criminal Code (injuring or causing the death of an unborn child while committing an offence)".
This is crazy, who’s afraid of a minority government? Everybody it seems. The libs can’t go on forever being this useless or nobody will ever care about them again.
Not to defend the Liberals, but it appears the NDP didn't whip their caucus either, if what I read at Thought Interrupted By Typos is correct. I haven't seen a list of MP's yet who voted for or against however.. so i don't know who voted for it and against.
Miss Vicky - I've been scouring the net for a list of how they voted, but haven't been able to find one yet. If Id known there wouldn't be a list up right away, I would have listened more closely, but I was more interested in just keeping track of the numbers not the names. The only ones I can recall are Szabo (no surprise) and Stoffer (NDP!! - HUGE surprise! Asshole!)
I'll post something as soon as I've got it. Babble will probably have a thread on it too, in the feminism category.
HT - Yes, what you say goes right along with what RB said above, the Senate is afraid to go against the government. I think when it gets to committee the bill will be subject to scrutiny that will reveal it for what it is... legal analysis is bound to show that it's a clusterfuck of a can of worms.
Hey JJ--
OT, but....
Thanks for the help in warding off the swarming of the shillophants.
RossK
.
Ross - Yes, people need to start hearing about this ASAP in no uncertain terms. MPs and Senators. This isn't going to stand.
Ross again - 
No problem. But I have to say I've yet to figure out what exactly you said that prompted this swarm of wingnuts. I didn't see anything that seemed unreasonable. Sensitive lot, aren't they.
Gigi - I totally agree that the name is part of what swings people. Like I said in an earlier post -- "Unborn victims"? Who wouldn't get behind helping "unborn victims"? Except that of course the bill doesn't help, protect or deter violence against "unborn victims" one bit. It's a despicably disingenuous use of hyperbole.
But that has always been their strategy. Use words, semantics, hyperbole, whatever it takes. People need to be informed about what this bill really does.
Bruce - Well, I can tell you one voter who doesn't care anymore. I'll be writing a big "fuck you" on my ballot in the next election for sure.
If the Liberals can show me they give a shit about women's rights, I'll think about voting for them, someday. For now, I've written them off. And the NDP too!!! Fuck them all.
I am currently trying to find out whether Stoffer was breaking ranks or whether the caucus was not whipped. Will report back as soon as I get some answers
JJ--
This one, I think, was a little different than your average swarm.
More specifically the post didn't attack the shillophants or their 'beliefs', but rather I was calling into question the bonafides of their masters - the true shills. Thus, the 'phants were sent out to attack the messenger.
But the bizarre thing is that, clearly, most of the 'phants didn't even understand what the heckfire was going on.
How else to explain how the vitriol soon turned on the subject of the military, guns and gut(lessnes)s?
.
Scott - With all due respect, I was absolutely sickened by what I saw this afternoon. That many Liberal MPs voting for this bill which everyone can see is clearly nothing but an attack on abortion rights -- it's worse than despicable, especially from a party that claims to be progressive. And they made the difference, without them it wouldn't have happened.
The fact that Dion didn't even show up -- gee, maybe that's a good thing... who knows? he might have voted in favour.
grrrr. damn.
Ross - Well, that's what threw me -- all the military hyperbole and "defending our right to speak" etc. Just because you dissed Billo? Overreact much??
Their wingnuts make ours look almost sorta kinda semi-quasi-almost-rational. Kinda
Miss Vicky - Yeah, I'd really like to know what was up with Stoffer. What a jerk!!! I thought Layton said he was whipping this vote. Bastards. You can't trust any of them to do what's right.
PSA - It's just Round Two, buddy
It's not over til that fat fucker in the PMO sings.
Well, the Bill goes to the Justice Committee I believe. If that's the case, and I read the Parliament of Canada website correctly, there are 8 Liberals on this Committee - a solid majority.
We need to find out how those 8 Liberals voted.
Scott - Oh, I definitely want to know how those guys voted.
If they voted in favour of this POS, they need to be gotten to and in no uncertain terms shown the error of their ways. If they voted against, they need huge amounts of encouragement to stay that course.
What can these guys do? What kind of procedure goes on when the bill goes to the Justice Committee? Do you know what specifically they'll be looking at? Language of the bill, legal repercussions etc?
IF you want the procedures on what one can do at COmmittee Stage, go here.
Meanwhile.. someone needs to confirm who is on that Committee, because I'm not sure I looked at the right one with the right members.
Ok.. unfortunately I was wrong ;(. I was looking at the Senate Justice Committee - hence the 8 Liberals there.
Here is your list of MP's onthe House Justice Committee:
Chair - Art Hanger
Vice Chairs: RĂ©al MĂ©nard, Brian Murphy
Members:
Larry Bagnell Blaine Calkins
Joe Comartin Rick Dykstra
Carole Freeman Dominic LeBlanc
Derek Lee Rob Moore
Daniel Petit
Um.. the one sub-chair should read Real Menard.
Link to members of this committee can be found here.
DEREK LEE??? Oh that'll be helpful.
Sorry for shouting, Scott, but I'm sure you understand.
Is it possible to get a real liberal in there somehow instead of Lee? Does Dion have any drag to be able to do this?
God, I haven't even looked at the others to see how they voted today. Must go do that.
That's one ugly justice committee. 5 CPC, 4 liberals, 2 BQ and 1 NDP, and of the 4 liberals 2 of them might as well be conservatives for the purpose of this exercise -- Lee and Murphy both voted YES.
So the of the 12 committee members, 7 voted yes in today's vote. Ummm not good.
There are associate members -- can't Dion tell Lee and Murphy to step down and let 2 real liberals do this thing?
Were any of those Liberals former Conservatives jj?
Toedancer - I just edited my latest post to add the committee members and how they voted today. That factor concerns me above all else right now.
All I can say is thank the Gods Garth voted against this piece of shite. Otherwise I wouldn't be able to bring myself to SPEAK to him again, let alone vote for him. And then where would I be?
Dion not showing up is utterly repulsive. Piss on him and all the Liberals, Dippers and BQ who voted for it. Because you can bet it had fuck all to do with what they thought was right, and EVERYTHING to do with what they thought would buy them the most votes come the next election.
JJ: You have the wrong Murphy-- Brian Murphy (aka Murphy (Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe)) voted nay.
Oh! Okay, thanks Mattt.
Hi Jennifer - Garth is one of the few that I think is relatively dependable when it comes to being socially progressive.
This is an outrage, though. I knew there'd be 5 or 6 Liberals who'd vote for it (Lee, Szabo and a few others), but I wasn't expecting so many traitors to come out of the woodwork. The Liberals who couldn't be bothered to show up for the vote also could have stopped this thing, so those pricks might as well have voted Yes. Disgusting.
Or, maybe they just all disagree with you, and recognize that abortion is not affected by this bill.
Sure. And maybe it's just a coincidence that the author of the bill is vehemently anti-abortion, and its loudest supporters have specifically said that they regard it as a first step to outlawing abortion.
But naw - it's all about jelly beans, right?
I don't think it'll pass third reading, but I obviously hope it will. JJ, as for your question on my blog, yes I do think there should be abortion laws. Whether they favour your opinion or not, at least they would be clearly defined.
Patrick - Like I'm the only one who recognizes that this has everything to do with abortion.
Go read the bill's supporters, they say as much themselves. Or better yet, go look at their facebook group where it says the bill "would be a key step in re-criminalizing abortion". (Screenshot one post down.)
I think you're just trolling.
Jennifer - I think Patrick's just trolling, at times he writes intelligently so I know he can't possibly be that obtuse
Ignore.
RA - Why?
You can call it trolling if you like. But the fact of the matter is that these MPs are not obligated to agree with you, nor are they obligated to sit out of the democratic process just because they don't agree with you.
It seems to me this must be a very rude awakening for you. Not too long ago you were bragging about how you and your fellow pro-abortion lobbyists hold all the cards, and won't give any up.
It seems you really don't hold all the cards, and even if you did, it wouldn't matter anyway -- the Canadian people control the pot, and polls confirm they support C-484.
Isn't democracy neat?
Patrick - Where was I "bragging that me and my fellow pro-abortionists hold all the cards"? Link please. You can't pull statements like that out of your ass.
What polls confirm the Canadian people support C-484? You're not referring to the ones commissioned by anti-choice groups, I hope, because they lack a little thing called credibillity.
Look dude, I get it, okay? I get that you're hot for this bill for whatever reason. I wish you were as enthusiastic about protecting pregnant women from violence. But oh well.
"We won't give an inch -- absolutely nothin'."
That sound familiar to you?
Not to mention your whole "there is no debate" episode and your buddy Mike basically threatening me with guns.
And, no. You don't get it. I'm enthusiastic about this bill because it's about protecting pregnant women from violence. It won't have the greatest effect without continuing to address the issue of violence against women in general, but it's part of the puzzle.
Frankly, I avoid anti-abortion websites like the plague. I'm referring to the Environics poll conducted in October of last year.
"Won't give an inch" doesn't sound like bragging that we hold the cards to me. It sounds like standing up for something.
There is no abortion debate. C-484 isn't about abortion.... right?
Anyway Patrick, if you want to believe that C-484 will protect pregnant women, knock yourself out. If it ever comes to fruition, I hope that it at least does do that. But I can't see how it would. The evidence south of the border just doesn't bear that out.
But maybe Canada will be different.
@ JJ who wrote "I was thinking about spoiling my next ballot anyway"
Please please don't spoil your ballot, or abstain from voting. In a time when there are too few people voting to begin with, these acts no longer constitute protest. In fact, they're counted on by the organized right-wingers who know that when they tell their groups (lets say, for example, their parishioners) to go out and vote a particular way, they do. It sounds like a conspiracy, but numbers seem to show otherwise.
Vote independent, or for the least evil... or even better, run for office! Just don't let others decide for you by willfully making your vote not count =-)
Commenting by HaloScan
