• pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    Basically, it didn’t get a hearing to get out of committee. Another fucked up headline politico. You’re consistently proving your worth.

    • phutatorius@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      it didn’t get a hearing to get out of committee

      And which party controls the committee? Go on, say it.

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        My memory is probably longer than a lot of lemmings’ lifetimes so no, not trying to much the football again, Lucy.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 days ago

      Basically, it didn’t get a hearing to get out of committee.

      And how does that not confirm the point of the article? No, seriously, I have no idea how the whole committee system works; who would’ve been responsible for getting it to a proper vote?

      • frunch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m also interested in getting a better understanding of how this works. I’m hopeful the comments OP comes back to explain. I genuinely would like to know exactly where this fell apart, because it doesn’t seem like that outrageous of an idea.

      • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        2 days ago

        Do you think for one second that this would have been even reported on if it was the other side? The headline should have read that it didn’t get out of committee and made boring, just like all of the crazy shit they sane wash for trump.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          2 days ago

          Uh… that has nothing to do with what I asked? Is there context that challenges the framing of the article? Because the article treats the bill not getting out of committee as adding insult to injury rather than a boring event.