Posted by Chartreuse, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Feb 12, 2013 at 6:04 pm

Marco Rubio is gonna have a bit to answer for!

Posted by Not an issue, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Feb 12, 2013 at 6:06 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 15, 2013 at 6:34 am
Perspective is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Let me get this straight: You mean you WANT to divert money from Domestic Violence to unproven programs on Sexual Assault that will probably do nothing about DV? And you WANT to lose local control of our programs where we know what is needed, to an office 2,000 miles away in a centrally planned office? (This centralization of power has worked so well so far, hasn't it?). And you WANT to lose your rights as a USA citizen if something happens on Tribal land?

Web Link

Just coat a some flypaper with honey, and what happens? Just call a Bill what it isn't...

The low information voter is going to end up destroying us. I wonder if any can think of other countries that have been destroyed from within in the same way?

Posted by That User Name is already, a resident of another community, on Feb 15, 2013 at 10:32 am
That User Name is already is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Half of the Republican senators voted against the Violence Against Women Act, WITHOUT offering any alternatives, just to defend their right flank in either 2014 or 2016. Rubio hiding behind and misrepresenting the tribal lands provision is a joke -- he's rarely voted in favor of the tribes!

This is the GOP doing their best to take a favorable 2014 senate map and shoot themselves in the foot with women voters. While they 'should' take the senate in 2014 (they have very defensible seats with 10 pickup opportunities, as it currently stands,) in 2016, the map tilts dramatically to the Dems, with all the 2010 tide winners now defending their actions (a complete reversal of 2014, with defensible Dem seats and 8+ weak GOP incumbents.) Rubio doesn't even poll well in FL.

As for Rubio and his sweaty response (more Polish Spring water botles, Mark!) it will be interesting how his vote against women helps him in the 2016 presidential primaries. And how he loses the 2016 women's vote worse than Romney/Ryan did.

Posted by That User Name is already, a resident of another community, on Feb 15, 2013 at 10:41 am
That User Name is already is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Before you think the poster above who linked to Rubio's lame excuses for voting against women, has any real awareness of the bill, find links to actual information below.

61 cosponsors, to extend the 1994 Violence Against Women law with the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

Here's the Summary: Web Link&

Title I: Enhancing Judicial and Law Enforcement Tools to Combat Violence Against Women

Title II: Improving Services for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking

Title III: Services, Protection, and Justice for Young Victims of Violence -

Title IV: Violence Reduction Practices

Title V: Strengthening the Healthcare System's Response to Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking

Title VI: Safe Homes for Victims of Domestic Violence, Dating Violence, Sexual Assault, and Stalking

Title VII: Economic Security for Victims of Violence

Title VIII: Protection of Battered Immigrants

Title IX: Safety for Indian Women

Here's the text: Web Link

Posted by Perspective, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2013 at 8:35 am
Perspective is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

In answer to the the "Thoughts?" question in the original post, my only thoughts relate to how the majority of voters of 2012 proved PT Barnum correct..there is a sucker born every minute.

Web Link

Web Link

The impossible promises are already unravelling ( "free" health care for all?? C'mon) See above links. The impossible promises of the left, led by Obama, can not be funded, period. But, we want so much to "believe", we let ourselves be suckered in.

We have to stop it..but how to get our nation back to reality and adulthood?

Posted by That User Name is already, a resident of another community, on Feb 18, 2013 at 1:59 pm
That User Name is already is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Poor perspective, her rant about the republicans not supporting the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 gets proven wrong, with simple posts to the actual law, so she reverts back to Tea Bag 101: it's all about Obamacare!!!

Take her first strawman falsehood: "The impossible promises are already unravelling ("free" health care for all?? C'mon)"

Just tell us who promised free health care for all.

Be happy to read your link of President Obama promising "free health care for all"

" C'mon."

Really. C'mon....

"C'mon."

"how to get our nation back to reality and adulthood?"

Start with using facts, not strawman fallacies, like "("free" health care for all?? C'mon)"

C'mon.