Are Republicans About To Back Stab Their Constituents??

Edgetho

Platinum Member
Mar 27, 2012
15,595
6,778
390
Sure sounds like it to me, but I could be wrong.

Am I?


Which could be as soon as this year. In fact, undoing the Harvard admissions decision is the least of it. Republicans and Democrats in Congress have embraced a precooked "privacy" bill that will impose race and gender quotas not just on academic admissions but on practically every private and public decision that matters to ordinary Americans. The provision could be adopted without scrutiny in a matter of weeks; that's because it is packaged as part of a bipartisan bill setting federal privacy standards—something that has been out of reach in Washington for decades. And it looks as though the bill breaks the deadlock by giving Republicans some of the federal preemption their business allies want while it gives Democrats and left-wing advocacy groups a provision that will quietly overrule the Supreme Court's Harvard decision and impose identity-based quotas on a wide swath of American life.

This tradeoff first showed up in a 2023 bill that Democratic and Republican members of the House commerce committee approved by an overwhelming 53-2 vote.
 
Sure sounds like it to me, but I could be wrong.

Am I?


Which could be as soon as this year. In fact, undoing the Harvard admissions decision is the least of it. Republicans and Democrats in Congress have embraced a precooked "privacy" bill that will impose race and gender quotas not just on academic admissions but on practically every private and public decision that matters to ordinary Americans. The provision could be adopted without scrutiny in a matter of weeks; that's because it is packaged as part of a bipartisan bill setting federal privacy standards—something that has been out of reach in Washington for decades. And it looks as though the bill breaks the deadlock by giving Republicans some of the federal preemption their business allies want while it gives Democrats and left-wing advocacy groups a provision that will quietly overrule the Supreme Court's Harvard decision and impose identity-based quotas on a wide swath of American life.

This tradeoff first showed up in a 2023 bill that Democratic and Republican members of the House commerce committee approved by an overwhelming 53-2 vote.
You cannot pass a law that is unconstitutional. It would not last even if it was passed and signed into law.
 
Have they ever not?

Rubes who think a billionaire who hires other billionaires to fix a system that made them billionaires in the first place vote Republican and they deserve that knife in their back.
 
Rubes who think a billionaire who hires other billionaires to fix a system that made them billionaires in the first place vote Republican and they deserve that knife in their back.

Other rubes think a teddy bear avatar with a childish Halloween-treat based screenname will fix an electoral system that made them lose to DJT in the first place - after their own Democrats shoved the proverbial knife in their political backs.
 
Other rubes think a teddy bear avatar with a childish Halloween-treat based screenname will fix an electoral system that made them lose to DJT in the first place - after their own Democrats shoved the proverbial knife in their political backs.

Holy run on sentence Batman ;)
 
Have they ever not?

Rubes who think a billionaire who hires other billionaires to fix a system that made them billionaires in the first place vote Republican and they deserve that knife in their back.
All of those checks and balances that Progs have eliminated. And the electoral college is next. The Federal Reserve Act, The16th amendment and the 17th amendment with outside influence and our own politicians selling us out. The House may still get some peasants. The Tea Party had many peasants. They were destroyed although some were elected with shills involved also. Once passed it is difficult to change laws. It is difficult to reduce the massive increases in any of the programs from year to year.
 
After a Supreme Court ruling attorney generals in some states ordered the end to the use of race in college financial aid decisions and in consideration of race in scholarships and grants. That's what I saw in one article that caught my interest in the last few days while scanning the web. I'm guessing this topic pertains congress' reaction to that court ruling.
 

Forum List

Back
Top