What If The Gop Took Over Government?

[frigidweirdo]

So what you're saying is that the Republican appointees consistently follow the Constitution, while the leftist appointees pursue the progressive agenda with open contempt for the Constitution?

It is a valid observation.

No, but here's a new point. You need to learn to read.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No, but here's a new point. You need to learn to read.

Perhaps you need to learn to comprehend what it is you are posting.

 

[frigidweirdo]

108th Congress. GOP had 51 Senate seats and 229 seats in the House. 2003 and 2004.

109th Congress. GOP had 55 Senate seats and 232 seats in the House. 2005 and 2006.

So you are admitting that you lied? You are admitting that he did not have congress for 4 years, but only 13 months total?

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

 

[frigidweirdo]

No, but here's a new point. You need to learn to read.

Perhaps you need to learn to comprehend what it is you are posting.

Hey, I know, why don't you just throw me an insult, and I throw one back, I could perhaps even insult your mum or something, that'll be fun (for 12 year olds). Or maybe you could actually try acting like an adult instead, that might be something a bit new.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - where deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - whether deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

 

[airplanemechanic]

I bet anyone saying yes to question 1 feels stupid. Republicans voted in more blacks than liberals did on November 4th.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I bet anyone saying yes to question 1 feels stupid. Republicans voted in more blacks than liberals did on November 4th.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - where deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

Yeah, you're right, I looked at what happened at the beginning of the term, and the Republicans went in with a 51/50.

As far as I can tell this changed the 4th November 2002 when Paul Wellstone was replaced by Dean Barkley (I), so there were two independents, though one of these had declared towards the Democrats.
Also Jean Carnahan (D) was replaced by Jim Talent (R) in November 2002. So by this time the Republicans had a 51/48 lead over the Democrats. This lasted until Bush's 2nd midterm eight years ago when the Democrats won.

So it seems that in November 2002 the Republicans gained the Senate and held it until 2007 which is five years. Unless I've missed something here. Though this chart below says four years.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - where deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

Yeah, you're right, I looked at what happened at the beginning of the term, and the Republicans went in with a 51/50.

As far as I can tell this changed the 4th November 2002 when Paul Wellstone was replaced by Dean Barkley (I), so there were two independents, though one of these had declared towards the Democrats.
Also Jean Carnahan (D) was replaced by Jim Talent (R) in November 2002. So by this time the Republicans had a 51/48 lead over the Democrats. This lasted until Bush's 2nd midterm eight years ago when the Democrats won.

So it seems that in November 2002 the Republicans gained the Senate and held it until 2007 which is five years. Unless I've missed something here. Though this chart below says four years.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - where deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

Yeah, you're right, I looked at what happened at the beginning of the term, and the Republicans went in with a 51/50.

As far as I can tell this changed the 4th November 2002 when Paul Wellstone was replaced by Dean Barkley (I), so there were two independents, though one of these had declared towards the Democrats.
Also Jean Carnahan (D) was replaced by Jim Talent (R) in November 2002. So by this time the Republicans had a 51/48 lead over the Democrats. This lasted until Bush's 2nd midterm eight years ago when the Democrats won.

So it seems that in November 2002 the Republicans gained the Senate and held it until 2007 which is five years. Unless I've missed something here. Though this chart below says four years.

 

[airplanemechanic]

I bet anyone saying yes to question 1 feels stupid. Republicans voted in more blacks than liberals did on November 4th.

 

[BlindBoo]

Actually it wasn't 4 years, it was SIX YEARS. The Dems had 50 Senate seats, but the 101st vote in the Senate, the deciding vote, is made by the VP, who happened to be Cheney, who happened to be Republican.

So the Republicans controlled the White House, the House and the Senate from the day Bush got into office 20th January 2001 until 3rd January 2006.

False - where deliberate or of ignorance I don't know.

Bush took office with a democrat controlled Senate. In the '02 elections, the GOP won a majority, but it only lasted a few months with the defection of Jeffords, who ran as a Republican but switched once the election was over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/19/us/jim-jeffords-who-altered-power-in-senate-dies-at-80.html?_r=0

The GOP took actual control in 2004 and held it until 2006.

Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress 1945-2008

From your link to the New York Times: “Increasingly, I find myself in disagreement with my party,” Senator Jeffords said in announcing his decision on May 24, 2001..........The Democrats’ plurality in the Senate lasted only 18 months, however — until the midterm elections of 2002, when Republicans took back control.

Again the GOP had majority control of both Houses and the White House for the entire 4 years between 2003 and 2007.

 

[JoeB131]

Facts don't change, Comrade. A fact is not dependent upon the political climate nor upon the pull of those involved. A fact is just that, factual.

The fact is that the SCOTUS had no legal basis for RvW and substituted political desire for legal ruling. Leftists don't operate on facts, you never have, it is not in your nature. You operate on favor and on pull. The left held power and sought to buy the favor of an interest group that could help them retain and expand power.

Fact was never a consideration.

Here's the real "facts" about Roe v. Wade.

Abortions were already commonplace before the decision. Doctors performed abortions and then marked down something else on their charts. The Authorities knew this was going on and did nothing about it.

the courts legalized what was already happening. This is why the birth rate didn't drop in 1974.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Abortions were already commonplace before the decision.

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

 

[JoeB131]

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

I'm going to help you out here, buddy. Here's the birth rate by year in the US.

Live Births and Birth Rates by Year Infoplease.com

1971 3,555,970 17.2
1972 3,258,411 15.6
1973 3,136,965 14.9
1974 3,159,958 14.9
1975 3,144,198 14.8
1976 3,167,788 14.8
1977 3,326,632 15.4

Guess what, there were JUST as many live births in 1974 as there were in 1972. In short, women who would have regularly had babies were not now having abortions.

I'm going to assume you are too young to know what things were like then, but the fact is, abortions were common before Roe.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

I'm going to help you out here, buddy. Here's the birth rate by year in the US.

Live Births and Birth Rates by Year Infoplease.com

1971 3,555,970 17.2
1972 3,258,411 15.6
1973 3,136,965 14.9
1974 3,159,958 14.9
1975 3,144,198 14.8
1976 3,167,788 14.8
1977 3,326,632 15.4

Guess what, there were JUST as many live births in 1974 as there were in 1972. In short, women who would have regularly had babies were not now having abortions.

I'm going to assume you are too young to know what things were like then, but the fact is, abortions were common before Roe.

no idea what your point is?? Before Row you had sex to have a family. After Row you had sex and killed the baby but live births would not have changed much.

 

[JoeB131]

no idea what your point is?? Before Row you had sex to have a family. After Row you had sex and killed the baby but live births would not have changed much.

wait, you think that before 1973, people only had sex to make babies?

Did you miss the parts in the history books where they told you about all the Hippies who were having the free love and screwing like rabbits in the 1960's? what do you think happened to all those fetuses?



Reality check, guy, the reason why Roe was put into place was that the abortion laws were already dead issues. No one was obeying them and no one was enforcing them.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Abortions were already commonplace before the decision.

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

WHat does this mean? That the number of OFFICIAL ABORTIONS shot up, or actual abortions?

 

[frigidweirdo]

no idea what your point is?? Before Row you had sex to have a family. After Row you had sex and killed the baby but live births would not have changed much.

Before Roe, (what's row?) nobody had sex because they actually just wanted a good old foowkin' then?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Abortions were already commonplace before the decision.

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

WHat does this mean? That the number of OFFICIAL ABORTIONS shot up, or actual abortions?

dear, liberalism=death whether its slowly starving 100 million in USSR and Red China or killing millons of babies:

United States abortion rates 1960-2012
United States abortion rates, data

year	abortions	abortion ratio	abortion percentage	abortion rate
per 1,000 live births	% of births+abortions	per 1,000 women aged 15-44	per 1,000 population
1960	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1961	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1962	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1963	390	0.10	0.01	0.01	0.00
1964	823	0.20	0.02	0.02	0.00
1965	794	0.21	0.02	0.02	0.00
1966	1,028	0.29	0.03	0.03	0.01
1967	2,061	0.59	0.06	0.05	0.01
1968	6,026	1.72	0.17	0.14	0.03
1969	25,918	7.2	0.71	0.62	0.13
1970	193,491	51.9	4.9	4.53	0.94
1971	485,816	136.6	12.0	11.14	2.34
1972	586,760	180.1	15.3	13.16	2.80
1973	744,600	237.4	19.2	16.33	3.51
1974	898,600	284.4	22.1	19.28	4.20
1975	1,034,200	328.9	24.8	21.72	4.79
1976	1,179,300	372.3	27.1	24.19	5.41
1977	1,316,700	395.8	28.4	26.42	5.98
1978	1,409,600	422.9	29.7	27.67	6.33
1979	1,497,670	428.6	30.0	28.79	6.65
1980	1,553,890	430.2	30.1	29.28	6.84
1981	1,577,340	434.6	30.3	29.25	6.87
1982	1,573,920	427.6	30.0	28.77	6.79
1983	1,575,000	432.8	30.2	28.45	6.74
1984	1,577,180	429.9	30.1	28.15	6.69
1985	1,588,550	422.4	29.7	28.01	6.68
1986	1,574,000	419.0	29.5	27.41	6.55
1987	1,559,110	409.3	29.0	26.93	6.43
1988	1,590,750	406.9	28.9	27.37	6.51
1989	1,566,870	387.8	27.9	26.85	6.35
1990	1,608,620	386.8	27.9	27.39	6.44
1991	1,556,510	378.6	27.5	26.34	6.15
1992	1,528,930	376.1	27.3	25.89	5.96
1993	1,495,000	373.7	27.2	25.25	5.75
1994	1,423,000	360.0	26.5	23.97	5.41
1995	1,359,440	348.6	25.8	22.82	5.11
1996	1,365,700	349.5	25.9	22.76	5.05
1997	1,335,000	344.0	25.6	22.27	4.90
1998	1,319,000	334.6	25.1	21.95	4.78
1999	1,314,800	332.1	24.9	21.87	4.71
2000	1,312,990	323.5	24.4	21.30	4.65
2001	1,291,000	320.7	24.3	20.88	4.53
2002	1,269,000	315.5	24.0	20.49	4.41
2003	1,250,000	305.6	23.4	20.17	4.30
2004	1,222,100	297.2	22.9	19.69	4.17
2005	1,206,200	291.5	22.6	19.41	4.08
2006	1,242,200	291.2	22.6	19.95	4.16
2007	1,209,640	280.3	21.9	19.48	4.01
2008	1,212,350	285.4	22.2	19.46	3.99
2009	1,151,600	278.8	21.8	18.47	3.75
2010	1,102,700	275.7	21.6	17.68	3.55
2011	1,058,500	267.7	21.1	16.97	3.38
2012	1,035,000*	261.8*	20.8*	16.56*	3.30*

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

* compiler's estimates

For sources, see Historical abortion statistics, United States.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Abortions were already commonplace before the decision.

total BS!! Study after study shows abortions were very limited before liberals. Then they instantly shot up to 1 million a year as liberals attacked and destroyed love and family in America.

WHat does this mean? That the number of OFFICIAL ABORTIONS shot up, or actual abortions?

dear, liberalism=death whether its slowly starving 100 million in USSR and Red China or killing millons of babies:

United States abortion rates 1960-2012
United States abortion rates, data

year	abortions	abortion ratio	abortion percentage	abortion rate
per 1,000 live births	% of births+abortions	per 1,000 women aged 15-44	per 1,000 population
1960	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1961	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1962	292	0.07	0.01	0.01	0.00
1963	390	0.10	0.01	0.01	0.00
1964	823	0.20	0.02	0.02	0.00
1965	794	0.21	0.02	0.02	0.00
1966	1,028	0.29	0.03	0.03	0.01
1967	2,061	0.59	0.06	0.05	0.01
1968	6,026	1.72	0.17	0.14	0.03
1969	25,918	7.2	0.71	0.62	0.13
1970	193,491	51.9	4.9	4.53	0.94
1971	485,816	136.6	12.0	11.14	2.34
1972	586,760	180.1	15.3	13.16	2.80
1973	744,600	237.4	19.2	16.33	3.51
1974	898,600	284.4	22.1	19.28	4.20
1975	1,034,200	328.9	24.8	21.72	4.79
1976	1,179,300	372.3	27.1	24.19	5.41
1977	1,316,700	395.8	28.4	26.42	5.98
1978	1,409,600	422.9	29.7	27.67	6.33
1979	1,497,670	428.6	30.0	28.79	6.65
1980	1,553,890	430.2	30.1	29.28	6.84
1981	1,577,340	434.6	30.3	29.25	6.87
1982	1,573,920	427.6	30.0	28.77	6.79
1983	1,575,000	432.8	30.2	28.45	6.74
1984	1,577,180	429.9	30.1	28.15	6.69
1985	1,588,550	422.4	29.7	28.01	6.68
1986	1,574,000	419.0	29.5	27.41	6.55
1987	1,559,110	409.3	29.0	26.93	6.43
1988	1,590,750	406.9	28.9	27.37	6.51
1989	1,566,870	387.8	27.9	26.85	6.35
1990	1,608,620	386.8	27.9	27.39	6.44
1991	1,556,510	378.6	27.5	26.34	6.15
1992	1,528,930	376.1	27.3	25.89	5.96
1993	1,495,000	373.7	27.2	25.25	5.75
1994	1,423,000	360.0	26.5	23.97	5.41
1995	1,359,440	348.6	25.8	22.82	5.11
1996	1,365,700	349.5	25.9	22.76	5.05
1997	1,335,000	344.0	25.6	22.27	4.90
1998	1,319,000	334.6	25.1	21.95	4.78
1999	1,314,800	332.1	24.9	21.87	4.71
2000	1,312,990	323.5	24.4	21.30	4.65
2001	1,291,000	320.7	24.3	20.88	4.53
2002	1,269,000	315.5	24.0	20.49	4.41
2003	1,250,000	305.6	23.4	20.17	4.30
2004	1,222,100	297.2	22.9	19.69	4.17
2005	1,206,200	291.5	22.6	19.41	4.08
2006	1,242,200	291.2	22.6	19.95	4.16
2007	1,209,640	280.3	21.9	19.48	4.01
2008	1,212,350	285.4	22.2	19.46	3.99
2009	1,151,600	278.8	21.8	18.47	3.75
2010	1,102,700	275.7	21.6	17.68	3.55
2011	1,058,500	267.7	21.1	16.97	3.38
2012	1,035,000*	261.8*	20.8*	16.56*	3.30*

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

* compiler's estimates

For sources, see Historical abortion statistics, United States.

You didn't answer my question.

Are official statistics the number of abortions that happened, or the number of abortions that "officially" happened?