CBS, NBC Ignore House Vote on Banning Sex-Selection Abortions; ABC Buries News in 3 a.m. Newscast
Yesterday at 2:14 p.m. EDT, the U.S. House of Representatives voted on the Prenatal Non-discrimination Act (PRENDA) of 2012, which would impose "criminal penalties on anyone who knowingly or knowingly attempts to... perform an abortion knowing that the abortion is sought based on the sex, gender, color or race of the child, or the race of a parent," according to congressional watchdog site GovTrack.us. The bill well-surpassed a simple majority (246-168 with 17 abstentions) but failed to pass on to the Senate as it was brought up for passage under a suspension of the rules, which requires a 2/3rds vote (at least 290 votes).
Yet news of the vote was not delivered on either the May 31 broadcast network newscasts -- ABC's World News, CBS's Evening News and NBC's Nightly News -- nor on the June 1 morning news programs -- ABC's Good Morning America, CBS's This Morning and NBC's Today.
For her part, Paula Faris, anchor of ABC's World News Now (broadcast at 3 a.m. EDT) did inform her few viewers of the vote, dismissing it as "a bit of election-year political theater." She did, however, note that some countries with more liberal abortion laws than the United States actually have bans on sex-selection abortions:
This is a law, gendercide, is a law that is being practiced in Canada, in Finland, in Norway, in Sweden, in Switzerland, countries that are very, very pro-abortion, pro-abortion rights, and they needed a 2/3rds majority though to get this one passed.
What's more, Faris added:
A little stat for you. They say that the practice of killing baby girls, or terminating pregnancies solely because the fetus is female is estimated to have produced a gender imbalance of more than 100 million girls around the world.
"Horrifying story, that part of it, anyway," co-anchor John Muller replied.
- Ken Shepherd's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
i was wondering
Submitted by misterbee241 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 1:14pm.
How this failed in the house with an R majority. Democrat political chicanery, that's how.
It needed a 2/3 majority.
Submitted by Order270 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 2:58pm.
7 Rs and 20 Ds defected.
To be fair, I think there was
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 1:21pm.
To be fair, I think there was some political gamesmanship by the GOP here but again, the Dems could simply do the right thing and have voted for the bill to pass. If they had, it would have sailed to passage and not been a black mark on them.
The Propaganda media doing
Submitted by John21 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 1:48pm.
The Propaganda media doing its best in Obama "Public Relations" reporting.
Nothing new
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Few men (or women) have the virtue to withstand the highest bidder.”George Washington
Just always remember
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 2:49pm.
It's the racist, woman-hating republicans we need to vote against (pay no attention to this bill which aimed to protect females and minorities - it was both introduced by racist, woman-hating republicans and it made some abortions illegal).
NBC, CBS, and ABC should be arrested and...
Submitted by Order270 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 2:53pm.
...thrown in jail for actively campaigning for Obama. They have broken the law. This is a game breaker and the silence is deafening.
Gendercide is destroying China
Submitted by frank14 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 3:00pm.
Yet libs want to follow them off the cliff.
~Straining at gnats and swallowing camels
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 3:02pm.
If it's okay to kill a baby, what difference does the reason for killing it make?
The implication here is that abortion is only wrong if it's performed in conjunction with a thoughtcrime.
EXACTLY!!!
Submitted by c5then on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 3:28pm.
And that is why it was defeated. Because once you allow that killing a baby is OK, then the reason is really not important.
I see more and more laws being passed that make the reason the crime not the action. This is just where George Orwell warned us that we were heading.
The rules in the House under which the vote came up required a 2/3 majority for it to pass. I'm pretty sure that the majority party sets the rules for each session and so the Republicans had some control over this aspect. IMO this was a sham vote.
If only we could develop an amnotic fluid test for liberal. Then I wonder if liberals would want unrestricted abortiions?
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
~Dead is dead, right?
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 3:47pm.
I doubt any of those murdered babies care what the justifications for their deaths were. If liberals admit that abortion is wrong under any particular circumstance, it will open the door to the, "What is a justifiable reason for killing a baby, then?" argument. And they can't have that....
People might start thinking crazy things, like it's wrong to kill a baby solely for convenience. Here's a picture I took of my little inconvenience this morning. One little birth control failure and now we're saddled with her; I don't know how we can bear it. :-)
Awwwww, Bru
Submitted by NOLAgirl on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 4:03pm.
What a cutie pie! Love her chubby cheeks :)
~You betcha they're chubby
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 5:02pm.
Her Highness has gained 5 pounds and grown 2 inches in her first month.
:-D
Lovely, Bru :)
Submitted by NOLAgirl on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 6:01pm.
Nothing sweeter than a cute, chubby baby. Keep up the good work, mom!
Beautiful blue eyes and
Submitted by dyardley on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 11:20am.
a sweet little rosebud mouth. What a little sweetie Bru.
~Thank you!
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 12:12pm.
She sure is; we couldn't ask for a sweeter tempered baby.
Holy cow
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 9:27am.
Are those Brunette locks I see?
Beautiful
~Yes, they are!
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 10:42am.
She has a full head of silky, golden brown hair. Apparently, my chances of having a brunette were one in five; the rest were bald at birth with blonde peach fuzz. I'm pretty darn pleased to have one with a strikingly different trait after four little peas in a pod.
And we kill half a million...
Submitted by Order270 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 4:37pm.
...of those sweet innocent beautiful little girls every year. WWWHHHHHHYYYY???
According to some, Order
Submitted by NOLAgirl on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 4:43pm.
the reason is because there are 400,000 foster children in need of homes and to have a baby is just adding to the problem.
I'm not sure what one has to do with the other.
Beautiful child
Submitted by Rukus on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 8:53am.
Nothing better than a baby with chubby cheeks. That's one beautiful baby Bru, good job! Mine are all grown up but I miss those times when they were babies... I am jealous. Love ya mom, raise them kids right ( I know you will). God Bless : )
~Thank you!
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 10:51am.
I'm lovin' all the baby snuggling, and getting a big kick out of how charmingly enraptured the 3 and a half year and 21 month old boys are with their little sister. Not that her big sisters aren't fond of her, but she's got those boys wrapped around her little finger already. LOL
Bru ---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 5:36pm.
What Rukus said !
Indeed !!!
MD
Shockers!
Submitted by berlet98 on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 5:33pm.
Shockers!
Most Americans have been shocked at one time or another. I still recall having my brains scrambled when I was a pre-teen and made the mistake of touching the stove and an ungrounded steam iron at the same time, but that was a different kind of shock.
Our elders were shocked by the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941. We all were shaken by the events in New York City and Washington, D.C. on September 11th, 2001.
In between, we experienced all types of minor and major emotional upheavals although not with the regularity with which they have occurred recently.
That is, if we even recognize them as shocking anymore since Americans seem to have become inured to shocks because of their frequency.
True, one man’s startling events are routine to others.
The Time cover of a young mother nursing her four year old and another picture of two uniformed, military moms nursing their infants in public struck many as shockingly inappropriate even though nursing is a completely natural function. Incidents of cannibalism in Florida and Maryland are totally unnatural and all but universally considered shocking.
Happenings causing reactions of revulsion and utter disbelief are regarded by some others as things that come with the human territory, simplistically acceptable because “they are what they are.”
For example, abortion has become so common, so ordinary, it is widely accepted since the mother or a relative or someone they know has aborted a pre-born baby. In fact, with over 50,000,000 abortions committed in the United States since 1973, the “procedure” has become almost commonplace and evokes little reaction from the majority of Americans and less attention from lawmakers.
Lack of concern for terminating an innocent, human life. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=24871.)
Who made these crazy rules?
Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 06/01/2012 - 7:19pm.
Let me get this straight: The bill passed with a simple majority, because it was voted on with the clear understand that it didn't need a 2/3rds "super" majority (that "suspension of the rules" they mentioned) which means, according to the Constitution, it should be handed over to the Senate as it DID pass, it WAS approved by the House, but it won't be handed over to the Senate because it didn't pass by a super majority. That's about right, isn't it? Well, who the hell made that crazy rule! It doesn't make any sense! We can pass the bill but we can't pass it along? That's just stupid!
Boehner, do your friggen job and hand this over to the Senate! The bill has passed, so pass it along! It's your Constitutional requirement! In case you're too stupid to figure it out, welt me explain it to you: a bill that has passed because of a suspension of the 2/3's rule has to be "passed" onto the Senate, because it's an "official" "passed" or "approved" bill. It's entered into the Congressional record as being "passed." SO DO IT! Pass it along! What the hell are you waiting for?
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
If memory serves, a similar
Submitted by Ken Shepherd on Sat, 06/02/2012 - 11:22pm.
If memory serves, a similar fate befell a House bill to repeal the incandescent light-bulb ban. Not sure if they've since worked to pass it through under the normal procedure as opposed to the suspension calendar.
Not sure how all this works, but I think basically the suspension calendar process is to get stuff through without going through committee hearings and committee markup and all that jazz. It's a fast-track procedure that is given a higher threshold for passage as a trade-off for circumventing the usual legislative sausage-making.
Abortion
Submitted by skippyf on Tue, 06/05/2012 - 1:18pm.
Mind your own business, please. Keep your hands to yourselves.
So....
Submitted by sentry_99 on Tue, 06/05/2012 - 2:55pm.
Who watches your bridge while you troll the interwebz.
I'm sure the unborn baby feels the same way.
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 06/05/2012 - 4:10pm.
.