Republicans War on Women

How about this:

"Well Well Well The president rushed to the phone the other day and Phoned that Flukey Girl bout Rush L comments ie Slut...and said he felt bad about all of that..............BUT this is the kicker Bill Maher can call S Palin IE CUNT TRASH THEN donate 1 Million to A super Pac FOR OBAMA ..And nothing is said Wow imagine That...Some people have been saying for Obama or the Pac to return the money..For the slurs But nobody will return the money because this is not a 2 way street....Is Bill Maher..king or what? S Palin is waiting for your call Mr President"

__________________________________________________________________________

Since this was posted under politics in Craig's List, I think it bears repeating, and it's a public comment, that gets to the point. Typos are the poster's original.

So, it is a bit interesting, this "other" perspective.

My opinion is, if Ms. Fluke is attending a Catholic college, why is she not following the absurd teachings of "no birth-control" set by the out-dated, theological thinking of the religious flock leaders, who set as an example, that child molesting and homosexual encounters are "ok" with them, as most have practiced this type of behavior with altar boys and the like.

This whole thing with Flukey is just a fluke. Pass out B.Control pills? Makes you wonder what people did from my parent's generation, when b.control pills were not available, nor was gov't assistance.

I took full responsibility for my pregnancies, and I did not even hear of Medicaid, food stamps, or pre-natal care, free doctor, delivery, diapers, formula, a money stipend, for every child you brought in this world, at a time I could have easily resorted to that, but I wouldn't, even if I when heard of it. I could have scammed the system when I had heard of outside help, but my morals were not on that level. I made sure, we as parents, raised those kids on our own, and fed them on our own. Bought life insurance, paid cash for medical, and did send them to private schools.

According to the report in the Times the other day, about how many births, etc., IL Medicaid pays for, if they cap it at ONE MISTAKE, these girls would not get pregnant the second time if it meant no extra money and food stamps.

I just recently ran across a gal in a hillbilly county in Indiana, who told me she receives $900.00 in food stamps alone, while living with the father, and knows who the father is. This is really ridiculous. Small kids don't eat that much under 5 years of age. Three of them. So, it's a money-maker for those who just have babies for the money. Can you imagine how much cash/free housing, etc., she receives, all the while driving the latest model vehicle. (This was in Indiana, not in IL).


A crack-down on ensuring every possible means of naming a father, before giving a hand-out, would crack down on the "how easy it is" to get benefits. Women do not get married (or, should I say any teen, twenty-something), when they have ONE child with someone they intend to marry, but put it off so the gov't / state pays the medical and provides the free stuff, all the while living with that father, who wanted to get married, but "a certain someone I KNOW", insisted she "was better off not getting married, so she can get more than just formula, free diapers, while they sit back and wait for her to take gov't paid tuition for her to take on-line college courses, and he gets to be the father, without too much of a dent in their income, because right now, as a "UNION" plumber who can't find a job (maybe HE HAS, by now), this really helped out their situation.

Obama condones this. Put a darn cap on one mistake only.

One woman, Flukey wants free birth control? Go to the already funded, "Planned Parenthood" and I'm sure they will give them out free, accompanied by raincoats, to protect her from vd, too, while she "plays around". God, how low can one stoop to be attending a Catholic college, asking for a hand-out for sex protection, and as ugly as she looked, a request for free plastic surgery should have been thrown in, to up her chances of adding a better looking, more successful lover, later. Most darn ridiculous thing in the world.

These women, girls, teens, illegals will multiply as long as the states take over responsibility for their choices and their lives, (and lies about "don't know who the father or fathers are). Why not? The more they have, the more they get in benefits.

Down the line, those kiddies cost even more when they turn 18, and the benefits run out, so they repeat the cycle.

happy jack wrote:

As I told you before, I don't care one bit whether Michelle Malkin or anyone else defended Limbaugh.

Then why did you post Malkin's entire op-ed?

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

As I told you before, I don't care one bit whether Michelle Malkin or anyone else defended Limbaugh.

Then why did you post Malkin's entire op-ed?

[b]Because the op-ed addressed the hypocrisy and double standards, which I had just been discussing.
Pay attention.

Too bad you lost the argument the minute you posted it. You used the exact same tactic to defend Limbaugh as the rest of the wingnut lemmings that "Little Green Footballs" described.

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

http://michellemalkin.com/

The war on conservative women

Wow! An op-ed by none other than Michelle Malkintent. Folks,Notice that nowhere in the article does she condemn the Limbecile for his remarks other than to meekly say she's sorry he said it. Instead she just confirms what I posted yesterday...

Quote :

Meanwhile, the entire right wing has gone into full-throated “they did it too” deflection mode for Rush Limbaugh today. Infantile schoolyard politics, to defend the indefensible.

Thanks for stepping in it again and reinforcing my proof of just how wrong you are. You never disappoint.

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

As I told you before, I don't care one bit whether Michelle Malkin or anyone else defended Limbaugh.

Then why did you post Malkin's entire op-ed?

[b]Because the op-ed addressed the hypocrisy and double standards, which I had just been discussing.
Pay attention.

Too bad you lost the argument the minute you posted it. You used the exact same tactic to defend Limbaugh as the rest of the wingnut lemmings that "Little Green Footballs" described.

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

http://michellemalkin.com/

The war on conservative women

Wow! An op-ed by none other than Michelle Malkintent. Folks,Notice that nowhere in the article does she condemn the Limbecile for his remarks other than to meekly say she's sorry he said it. Instead she just confirms what I posted yesterday...

Quote :

Meanwhile, the entire right wing has gone into full-throated “they did it too” deflection mode for Rush Limbaugh today. Infantile schoolyard politics, to defend the indefensible.

Thanks for stepping in it again and reinforcing my proof of just how wrong you are. You never disappoint.

My, my, my - playing the Boredom Card twice on the same topic.
A new low, even for you.
Not quite sure why the fact that I refuse to defend Limbaugh puts so much hot pepper in your panties, but I haven't seen this type of reaction from you since you were fighting for the federal funding of the Cowboy Poetry Festival.
The challenge is still out there - produce one single sentence where I have defended Limbaugh on this matter.
One single sentence.
Can't quite manage to do that one little thing, can you, Margaret?

The war on women continues to escalate...
Romney Would End Planned Parenthood
Nice work Mittens! You've just managed to piss off and energize a whole lot more women.

happy jack wrote:

All participants on this thread (other than myself) have yet to denounce any of Maher's public insults to women.

Yes. Maher's an asshole; has been for years. So are about 99% of the muppets in the media, comedians or not. And posters on forums. I thought it was obvious enough not to have to mention. I'll denounce every negative thing ever said by anyone in the history of the planet. Yippee.

Now how 'bout you denounce anything said by a conservative to malign climate scientists and biologists? Every asshat that alleged them to be in a conspiracy against the American public? Socialists that are trying to kill your children by tanking the economy. Every asshat that compared Obama to Hitler, still denies he's an American. Blah blah blah...

See...? This stupid, childish game of "well, so and so did it..." can go on forever. It's sooo boooring...

Just accept the fact that the public views Limbaugh's poorly informed attempt at character assassination as far more egregious than a few shitty jokes by Maher, and move the fuck on.

Quote :

Demanding women deliver dead babies is unethical and unsafe

In a debate on the floor of the Georgia State house over a bill to force women to bring all pregnancies after 20 weeks to term, even in cases of dead or non-viable fetus, this Georgia representative reaches a new low. State Rep Terry England seems to be suggesting pigs and cows do it, why can't humans?

Rep. Terry England compares women to cows, pigs and chickens. from Bryan Long on Vimeo.

Aside from this genius on-the-farm reasoning of Mr England, the failures of reasoning and misrepresentations of scientific knowledge engaged in to pursue this legislation are many.

The legislation is justified ostensibly because of the ability of the fetus to feel pain after 20 weeks, but there is no data or a legitimate scientific basis for this claim. Our knowledge of neurological development would suggest that conscious perception of pain may not be possible for a fetus at any point and the neural framework for transmission of pain is not even mature before 29-34 weeks.

Second is the issue that concern for the pain for a nonviable or dead fetus should not outweigh medical risk to the mother. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists recommend dilation and extraction or induction of labor once the diagnosis of stillbirth has been made. The risks of carrying a non-viable fetus are the higher complication rate of delivery versus dilation and extraction, as well as a very high risk to the mother of complications like disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) if the amniotic sac is ruptured and she is exposed to the dying tissue. For stillbirth or nonviable pregnancies, dilation and extraction is far safer and more effective with 24% of patients undergoing labor experiencing complications compared to 3% for D&E.

It has been under-reported that since the 2010 election, the rate of anti-contraception, anti-abortion, and frankly anti-woman legislation has shot through the roof. In 2011 state legislatures have enacted a record number of laws restricting reproductive rights:

Quote :

In the 50 states combined, legislators introduced more than 1,100 reproductive health and rights-related provisions, a sharp increase from the 950 introduced in 2010. By year's end, 135 of these provisions had been enacted in 36 states, an increase from the 89 enacted in 2010 and the 77 enacted in 2009.

These include everything from preventing physicians from using telemedicine to prescribe medication to requiring ultrasounds prior to abortion despite the fact no association of OB/Gyns supports universal ultrasound prior to abortion. In an effort to legislate their control of women's reproductive systems, they are interfering more and more with the physician-patient relationship. It has become so extreme that in 11 states they have legislation requiring physicians to perform unnecessary invasive procedures, basically forcing physicians to engage in unethical medical practices. There is no legitimate medical reason for these measures. These exist to shame women, and increase the expense and difficulty of constitutionally-protected medical procedures and medical decisions like birth control and abortion.

These efforts to ban abortion after 20 weeks, which have succeeded in several states including Nebraska, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Oklahoma,Alabama and Utah, are a highly intrusive attack on women's reproductive freedom. It is once again, an attempt to insert politics in the doctor-patient relationship. Finally it is medically unethical, dangerous, and morally bankrupt to expose women to greater risk by preventing them from having the option of safe termination of pregnancy all for the sake of a dead fetus.

Wasn't one of the whiny objections to "Obamacare" that healthcare should be left to the doctor and their patient? So much for that, huh?

Ignoring, too, the fact that carrying a dead fetus can kill you. Necrotizing tissue releases toxins into the body. A women in an online group told me her story - her twins died in utero at two months back when abortion was illegal and birth control not available. It took her another month to naturally expel them, causing her to become very ill and almost die from sepsis.

But you know, fuck her and women like her, right? It's not up to her or the doctor; it's only about the babies... even if they're dead.

Totally not a war on women at all.

Heretic wrote:

Now how 'bout you denounce anything said by a conservative to malign climate scientists and biologists? Every asshat that alleged them to be in a conspiracy against the American public? Socialists that are trying to kill your children by tanking the economy. Every asshat that compared Obama to Hitler, still denies he's an American. Blah blah blah...

This was a very narrow discussion, involving two, and only two, individuals, one who used very crude language against women, and one who used very crude language against women and retarded children, with one being denounced vehemently by all aboard, and with the other being given a free pass by all aboard (except by me, and now, allegedly, by you). If you spent all of your time denouncing the most extreme views from the left, and I spent all of my time denouncing the most extreme views from the right, it would never end. If you can drop some Ritalin, however, and manage to focus on the two individuals at hand rather than climate scientists and socialists, I don’t see the harm in this discussion.

Heretic wrote:

Just accept the fact that the public views Limbaugh's poorly informed attempt at character assassination as far more egregious than a few shitty jokes by Maher, and move the fuck on.

The “few shitty jokes by Maher” are every bit as much of an attempt at character assassination as anything Limbaugh has ever said.
It’s quite amazing how, once again, Maher gets the free pass.
For a minute there, you had me fooled, but I guess old hypocrisy dies hard.

Heretic wrote:

Ignoring, too, the fact that carrying a dead fetus can kill you. Necrotizing tissue releases toxins into the body. A women in an online group told me her story - her twins died in utero at two months back when abortion was illegal and birth control not available. It took her another month to naturally expel them, causing her to become very ill and almost die from sepsis.

But you know, fuck her and women like her, right? It's not up to her or the doctor; it's only about the babies... even if they're dead.

Totally not a war on women at all.

Yep. And that's what this thread is really about. The simple fact of the matter is that the GOP promotes policies that can rightfully be characterized as "anti-woman." IMHO, that's far more important than "crude language," whether that comes from the left or the right.

happy jack wrote:

If you can drop some Ritalin, however, and manage to focus on the two individuals at hand rather than climate scientists and socialists, I don’t see the harm in this discussion.

Probably no harm in it, but the discussion is irrelevant. For the record, I agree that Maher has said some assinine things. The main difference between Limbaugh and Maher is that Limbaugh has far more influence on public discourse than Maher.

Are the Repubs engaged in some sort of secret contest to see who can introduce the most insane legislation?


AZ GOP Bill Forces Women to Prove They’re Not Having the Sex

Quote :

“When sluts need shaming, the Republican Party is your man”
Charles Johnson

Just when you think the right wing can’t possibly get any more reactionary and misogynistic, the Arizona Senate GOP pushes a bill allowing employers to demand that a woman prove she isn’t using contraception just because she wants to have the sex — and deny coverage if the employer judges her to be a round-heeled slattern.
And these Neanderthal throwbacks are whining about “federal interference” and calling this “religious freedom.” Freaking unbelievable.

The good news?
Republicans Losing on Birth Control as 77% in Poll Spurn Debate

Quote :

Americans overwhelmingly regard the debate over President Barack Obama’s policy on employer-provided contraceptive coverage as a matter of women’s health, not religious freedom, rejecting Republicans’ rationale for opposing the rule. More than three-quarters say the topic shouldn’t even be a part of the U.S. political debate.
More than six in 10 respondents to a Bloomberg National Poll -- including almost 70 percent of women -- say the issue involves health care and access to birth control, according to the survey taken March 8-11.

A friend in Arizona discovered at 5 or 6 months pregnant that her baby had died. Her parents flew out to be with her and went with her to the doctor to schedule the delivery. The doctor said it would happen when it happened - no need to intervene. Mom and Dad explained their little girl wasn't going to wait and be tortured any more by people asking how far along was she, what was she having, etc. The doctor relented. This was at least 20 years ago.

happy jack wrote:

If you spent all of your time denouncing the most extreme views from the left, and I spent all of my time denouncing the most extreme views from the right, it would never end.

Which was my point exactly, which is why I followed my deliberately off topic point about "climate scientists and socialists" with:

Quote :

See...? This stupid, childish game of "well, so and so did it..." can go on forever. It's sooo boooring...

Glad to see you're not actually reading my posts.

happy jack wrote:

The “few shitty jokes by Maher” are every bit as much of an attempt at character assassination as anything Limbaugh has ever said.

Nope. 'Cause when Maher said it, (some of) his audience laughed. No one with an IQ over 15 actually agreed with it, came away thinking "Wow! Sarah Palin really is a sexually promiscuious whore!", unlike Limbaugh's nonsense.

Scorpion wrote:

The main difference between Limbaugh and Maher is that Limbaugh has far more influence on public discourse than Maher.

By magnitudes.

Maher is a comedian/writer on HBO, who once lost a show because of what he said on it. Few condemned his more recent jokes when he said them because, let's be honest, few heard them.

Limbaugh, OTOH, is regarded as the heart of the Republican party, one who has enough clout that Republican leaders themselves are scared to cross him. He runs the highest rated talk show on radio, was made an honorary member of Congress in 1994, who's getting a bust in the Missouri Capitol, and So Super Great they honored him on the floor of the Senate within weeks of 9/11. He deliberately chose to demonize Fluke in his poorly informed screed, and rather than ignore it and simply move on, brain dead conservatives are repeating "She's a whore! A seekrit activist! She's wants a government handout to pay for healthcare!" (read: everything he got wrong about Fluke's actual testimony) all over the place.

Watched the Daily Show - just hilarious!

Lawmaker Suggest Beaten Wives Remember the Good Times

Quote :

Remember earlier this month when another Wisconsin lawmaker thoughtfully suggested that maybe single parenthood should be considered a factor that may be indicative of child abuse? Pridemore was a co-sponsor of the bill that would've made it a crime for a person to dare try to raise a child on their own outside of the pillowy soft Magic Zone of marriage. But what about women who are being abused by their husbands? Shouldn't they have the option to extract themselves from an unhealthy situation? Nope, says Pridemore. And he's got some expert abused spouse marital advice as well: "If they can refind those reasons and get back to why they got married in the first place it might help."

I guess the women killed by their husbands each year didn't think/pray hard enough. Thanks Don! You're at True Christian!

And one other point... Jesus hates divorce as much as gay marriage and birth control. So that means employers won't have to pay for the healthcare of spouses of remarried divorcees and their subsequent children since paying for either is condoning such a sinful lifestyle. Right? "Moral objections" and all...

Who is running against Pridemore - maybe I'll make a contribution.

Yes, there is a Republican war on women voters

Quote :

While it’s true that President Obama’s re-election campaign is gearing up a major push this week to win over female voters, the fact is that Republicans have been helping him out on this front for weeks.

From the GOP primary to the conservative airwaves, in state legislatures and in Congress, Republicans are playing politics with women’s health and basic liberties, driving a wedge among conservatives and driving women voters toward the Democrats.

. . .

Fast-forward to February 2011 when anti-choice Republicans pushed a rogue measure to cut off all federal funding from Planned Parenthood, even though less than 3% of services provided by Planned Parenthood are abortions, none of which are paid for using federal grant dollars.

Still, Republicans saw an opportunity to fire up their fringe base while undermining a liberal-leaning advocacy organization. And if the five million American women who get affordable health care from Planned Parenthood every year had to be thrown under the bus, so be it. All’s fair in politics.

. . .

Presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who has repeatedly reiterated his staunch opposition to contraception, began surging in the polls among conservative voters.
Republicans in Virginia proposed a law that would require women seeking abortions, even those resulting from rape or incest, to first submit to mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasounds -- a further invasion of their bodies.

And Republicans in Texas pushed through a law defunding Planned Parenthood clinics in the state, cutting off at least 60,000 low-income women from their health care providers.

. . .

Which is all to say that when President Obama’s Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius issued preliminary statements on how the contraception mandate would be applied to religiously-based institutions like hospitals and universities with a primarily public purpose, the Republican Party pounced on the situation with the hopes of exploiting it for political gain.

Never mind that 28 states had already instituted similar regulations with no fanfare or uproar from religious conservatives. This was different.

Republican strategists saw this as a slam dunk opportunity to criticize health care reform and paint President Obama as opposing religious liberty. If basic contraception access for women was the casualty, who cares? In fact, for some Republican politicians, like Rick Santorum, that was an added bonus!

Whether or not you think this amounts to a Republican “war on women,” it’s definitely a “war on women voters.”

In other words, "Fuck your health and your access to health care, ladies, we have to stick it to Obama." And women voters are responding in kind:

Quote :

In a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll while in an imagined face-to-face match up, President Obama currently trails Mitt Romney by six percentage points with male voters,but the president has an 18 point lead with women --- across political parties.

First they awakened the Frankenstein's monster of the Republican party, the tea baggers, ostracizing most rational conservatives who don't buy any of the End of the World/Guns/Religion and anti-science conspiracy theories. And now they're doing the same to women.

This will be studied by political scientists as the most poorly managed political party for years to come.

Heretic wrote:

In other words, "Fuck your health and your access to health care, ladies, we have to stick it to Obama." And women voters are responding in kind:

Quote :

In a new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll while in an imagined face-to-face match up, President Obama currently trails Mitt Romney by six percentage points with male voters,but the president has an 18 point lead with women --- across political parties.

First they awakened the Frankenstein's monster of the Republican party, the tea baggers, ostracizing most rational conservatives who don't buy any of the End of the World/Guns/Religion and anti-science conspiracy theories. And now they're doing the same to women.

This will be studied by political scientists as the most poorly managed political party for years to come.

Romney was campaigning today at a pancake house in Rosemont. Outside were a group of women,led by Jan Schakowsky D-Ill 9th Congessional district,protesting Mittens plans to eliminate Planned Parenthood. What a gift this has become.

Maybe the GOP is deliberately trying to tank Romney's chances at becoming President. They know he'll get the nomination despite their best efforts, and they actually think that will be worse than an Obama presidency, but they just can't come out and say it.

I don't know. None of it makes any sense. I'd just really like to meet the guy that greenlit this whole thing and pick his brain.

Quote :

War on women and women's healthcare? YES! RIGHT NOW!

Step 1: Ban contraception
Step 2: ???
Step 3: PROFIT!!

The Presidency is OURS! It's foolproof!

Heretic wrote:

Maybe the GOP is deliberately trying to tank Romney's chances at becoming President. They know he'll get the nomination despite their best efforts, and they actually think that will be worse than an Obama presidency, but they just can't come out and say it.

I seriously doubt that. Congressional races are at stake and the last thing they want to do give back the gains they made in 2010. They don't like Romney,that's for sure,but they're pretty much stuck with him. A brokered convention would be a disaster,IMO. What could you say about a party that tells it's members to forget who they voted for,instead we'll pick the candidate.

I don't know. None of it makes any sense. I'd just really like to meet the guy that greenlit this whole thing and pick his brain.
[/quote] Forget trying to make any sense of it. Look at some of the stuff that comes out of their mouths. If Santorum had just kept his really,really,crazy ideas to himself there might actually be a real horse race. Instead for example he thought it was a good idea to bash JFK,which had to help alienate him with Catholics. There was no logical reason for him to do that. Instead he's a distant 2nd with almost no chance of catching up,barring as Romney said "A miracle".

Republicans need to “get off” the issue of contraception and “fix” the perception that the party has spurned women, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) declared Sunday.
Whatever you say,Gramps. Try convincing your party's kooky base and candidates like Rick Santorum.

Yeah,make sure kids grow up in a house where Dad beats the crap out of Mom. Gee,What could possibly go wrong psychologically? I would bet dollars to donuts that if you asked violent felons about their homelife as a child that would be an all too common theme....
Wisconsin Lawmaker Says Women Should Stay in Abusive Marriages

Quote :

In Wisconsin -- yes, the same state where lawmakers have introduced a bill penalizing single mothers for being unmarried -- a Republican state representative has come out against divorce for any reason -- even domestic abuse.

Instead of leaving an abusive situation, women should try to remember the things they love about their husbands, Representative Don Pridemore said. "If they can re-find those reasons and get back to why they got married in the first place it might help," he told a local news station.

Pridemore -- who, coincidentally, is a co-sponsor of Republican state Senator Glenn Grothman's "being single causes child abuse" bill as well as a controversial voter ID bill that was ruled unconstitutional earlier this week -- also said that while he thinks women are capable of caring for a family "in certain situations," fathers are the only ones who provide structure and discipline. If they don't grow up with married biological parents, Pridemore says, "kids tend to go astray."

Grothman, for his part, continues to defend his controversial bill. Now, though, not only is single parenthood a factor in child abuse, women in particular are to blame for it.

"There's been a huge change over the last 30 years, and a lot of that change has been the choice of the women," Grothman said.

If I had more $$, I would contribute to ANYONE who would run against Pridemore and Grothman. (Is that Gross man with a lisp)?