Perhaps yours but not mine. We're joined at the hip. You should be sop fortunate, everybody should! Regards, Tom

This is awesome! I couldn't agree more. Marriage doesn't guarantee a commitment and married people also have unplanned pregnancies.

I myself don't need a to legally state I am married to feel 100% committed to my best friend and love of my life. We have talked about it and keep saying one day we'll get around to it. But really, neither of us cares one way or another. We talk about the future in terms of retirement, children, travel, etc... a life lived together. The traditional idea of marriage has been changing for some time. I have a great aunt and uncle who have been shacking up happily for 45 years or so.

As far as birth control methods, yes both sexes are responsible. But the woman is in the unique position of being the one that gets pregnant. I was about to turn 20 when I found out I had gotten pregnant. I had been on the pill. I had only been with one person, and he and I had been together for sometime. My boyfriend urged me to get an abortion. But being a strong willed woman, I noted his opinion and considered all my options myself. I even looked into the RH shot I would need due to being one of the 15% that is negative for it. In the end, I decided to abort at 4-5 weeks. Afterward, I was relieved. And since, I have not regretted it once. I realize to some, I am a murderer. Fortunately, those opinions do not bother me. I took the course of my life in my own hands that day. I made a decision for myself and my body that is really no one else's business.

Guess you missed it,

The problem is Planned Parenthood drives sex 'education', they are the last people I want 'educating' our children.


Of course your position of responsibility doesn't cover a guy stepping up, and
Creates a helluva dilemma for females that do it your way, let things take a natural course. The problem with that is when they don't fit into YOUR idea of proper behavior, you make things hard by denying love a support.

You assume way too much.


On one hand you make them fit your mold, but on the other hand you take away choice and options. In reality this only happens when females are dependent and have no resources, or support, and then both mother and child suffers while you self righteously remove logical choices for unrealistic ones.

Even the ones who do the right things by YOUR standards are subject to the same hardships after a divorce. I get you lobby for unborn children, a noble endeavor, but unless YOU take responsibility for YOUR positions, by giving that love and support, you should mind your own business and take care of your own.

Oh pffffttt. I've had enough self-righteous spiels, you're just perpetuating myths. Let's deal with reality, not manufactured bullsh*t.

You want facts, okay, woman and children suffer when you take away their choices, and forrce yours on them!

That's the real fact to deal with. Its not your business in the first place, and when you make it your business you make it YOUR responsibility.

That's reality.

Hello again, wingers:

You know, this is really simple. I speak for the ALL the liberals in the whole wide world. We'd AGREE with your stance on abortion if you didn't have to take away women's right's to accomplish it..

excon

You want facts, okay, woman and children suffer when you take away their choices, and forrce yours on them!

Thats the real fact to deal with. Its not your business in the first place, and when you make it your business you make it YOUR responsibility.

Thats reality.

As I said way back, the idea that once the child is born we leave them to fend for themselves is a manufactured MYTH. That's reality.

Funny how you libs are fond of telling us we're all in this together until it comes to abortion, then it's stay out of it, it doesn't affect you, it's none of your business. But let's see, I can't buy a Happy Meal in San Francisco, a 20 oz soda in New York, a medium-rare hamburger in North Carolina, swim in a river in King County, WA without wearing a personal flotation Device, smoke in my own home in some places, give my kid a homemade lunch in some schools - but you can kill your baby if you want.

As I said way back, the idea that once the child is born we leave them to fend for themselves is a manufactured MYTH. That's reality.

No its not its right wing policy to give to the rich by taking from the poor, just read Mitts plan. Oh, thats right, you refuse to!

No its not its right wing policy to give to the rich by taking from the poor, just read Mitts plan. Oh, thats right, you refuse to!

Do you not realize how silly that sounds, that a bunch of "rich, white guys" as your side often calls us, are going to go increase their wealth by taking it from people who have none. You can't get blood out of a turnip.

So you read the plan right?? Stop dodging a simple question. That's the silly part to me. And the part about YOU being a rich white guy... I know better.

As I said way back, the idea that once the child is born we leave them to fend for themselves is a manufactured MYTH. That's reality.

Funny how you libs are fond of telling us we're all in this together until it comes to abortion, then it's stay out of it, it doesn't affect you, it's none of your business. But let's see, I can't buy a Happy Meal in San Francisco, a 20 oz soda in New York, a medium-rare hamburger in North Carolina, swim in a river in King County, WA without wearing a personal flotation Device, smoke in my own home in some places, give my kid a homemade lunch in some schools - but you can kill your baby if you want.

I agree. That's ridiculous for the government to monitor what we eat! When did the government become our parent? Trying to keep us from getting fat or getting cancer. Aren't we adults capable of making our own decisions and dealing with the outcome?

but you can kill your baby if you want. Boy! Does that take me back to the old daze when I was busy busting religious wackos out side the clinic I worked at. I would have loved to get speechlesstx.locked into my sights. How many times have I heard those nuts scream, "DON'T KILL YOUR BAY-BEE"? Just like old speechless posted.
Listening to "old spechless" rant and rave makes me homesick for the days when I had a job that was so much fun that I would have paid them to work there.
SApeechless. If you would have stepped one foot onto clinic property you would have been mine and enjoyed the hospitality of The Sarasota City Jail. And I would have hoped that they put you in a cell with a 6'5" 300 pound dude named Bubba that really dug males.

Boy! Does that take me back to the old daze when I was busy busting religious wackos out side the clinic I worked at. I would have loved to get speechlesstx.locked into my sights.

Funny, but you're the only one using threatening language and quite frankly, it pi$$es me off a little. You don't scare me goober.


How many times have I heard those nuts scream, "DON'T KILL YOUR BAY-BEE"? Just like old speechless posted.

Obviously you can't distinguish the difference between having a discussion on the internet and morons yelling at women at an abortion clinic. We've already had this discussion beginning here, (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/war-women-662145-38.html#post3248248) so you can just put your baseless, rabid attempt attempt to paint me as a right-wing wacko aside and go harass someone else..


SApeechless. If you would have stepped one foot onto clinic property you would have been mine and enjoyed the hospitality of The Sarasota City Jail. And I would have hoped that they put you in a cell with a 6'5" 300 pound dude named Bubba that really dug males.


Pardon me, but this post of yours is full of more bovine excrement than the Texas panhandle. You seem a little overtaken with blind rage, perhaps counseling would help.

Hello again, Steve:

You asked a while ago whether we thought abortion would ever be illegal again, and you said you didn't think it ever would.

I, however, think it's just one right wing Supreme Court Justice away.

excon

And I thought the Obamacare mandate would be overturned.



Desperate for what?

Hello again, Steve:

You asked a while ago whether we thought abortion would ever be illegal again, and you said you didn't think it ever would.

I, however, think it's just one right wing Supreme Court Justice away.

excon

No wonder the right wing is so desperate!!

No war on women here

PM gets lift on way to raise status of women (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/pm-gets-lift-on-way-to-raise-status-of-women-20120829-2512n.html)

Desperate for what?

The house, the senate, the presidency, the courts and the full control of money and morality. And no prisoners

The house, the senate, the presidency, the courts and the full control of money and morality. And no prisoners

Dude, do you really think we're putting all our marbles in overturning abortion? We're not the ones making this about women's rights, you are.

We're not the ones making this about women's rights, you are.Hello again, Steve:

Not really... You WANT it to be about abortion, but you NEGLECT to mention that in order to achieve your goal, you have to DESTROY women's reproductive rights... You can't just talk about ONE side of the equation and IGNORE the other side...

Well, that's why we're here.

excon

Dude, do you really think we're putting all our marbles in overturning abortion? We're not the ones making this about women's rights, you are.

Women's rights
Abortions
Voting rights
Poor people rights
Church rights
State rights
Immigation rights
Old peoples rights
Governments rights
Gay rights

Conservatives vs everybody else's rights.

Biden is obviously pro-woman...

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/biden-bikers2-lg.jpg

Biden is obviously pro-woman...

http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/biden-bikers2-lg.jpg

This is hilarious! I like Joe even more now!

I think Joe is about to get his head punched in

This is hilarious! I like Joe even more now!

Joe is always good for a laugh, that's for sure. I would have had a caption contest but would be hard to keep it clean. What the heck..

"Stand up, Chuck, let 'em see ya."

Sleezy rider .

That Obama, nothing but class. He's got some ecards to send out to convince your friends that Romney wants to take us back to the stone age. Like this one:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/ladyparts.img_assist_custom-640x399.jpg

to convince your friends that Romney wants to take us back to the stone age.Hello again, Steve:

Not the stone age, Steve.. Get real... But, certainly back to the early 20th Century. You deny it, of course, but the Supreme Court is ONE vote away from overturning Roe v. Wade. If Romney is elected, he'll appoint two and maybe three Supreme Court Justices...

Now, YOU may believe that they'll UPHOLD Roe when they have the chance, but the rest of us haven't drunk that koolaid...

excon

No, you drank the koolaid that has you convinced beyond all reason that anyone besides Islamists and Democrats are waging a war on women.

Well Speechless you might not have drank the koolaid but you surely must be dropping LSD if you believe its' the Democrats and not the Replucicans waging war on women. In 13 years of working at a woman's clinic all the religious wackos protesting and screaming outside the clinics were all Republicans. Not a Democrat in the lot.
I put a lot of time in court getting these protesters that thought God gave them the right to ignore our laws in the slammer. And I got to tell you this. Every time I got one of those wackos jail time it felt GOOOOD! I would have loved to have met you out there. Tom PS- I really dig those "Lady Parts" do you have a problem with that? Are you peeking out of the closet? Inquiring minds want to know!

Well Speechless you might not have drank the koolaid but you surely must be dropping LSD if you believe its' the Democrats and not the Replucicans waging war on women.


Dude, we aren't the ones telling women they can't make it without Obama's help.


In 13 years of working at a woman's clinic all the religious wackos protesting and screaming outside the clinics were all Republicans. Not a Democrat in the lot.

And this has exactly what to do with the vast majority of Republicans? Nothing, not a damn thing.


I put a lot of time in court getting these protesters that thought God gave them the right to ignore our laws in the slammer. And I got to tell you this. Every time I got one of those wackos jail time it felt GOOOOD!

That's a rather sadistic attitude. Look it up.


I would have loved to have met you out there.

You threatening me, dude?


Tom PS- I really dig those "Lady Parts" do you have a problem with that? Are you peeking out of the closet? Inquiring minds want to know!

What's your problem? Seriously you dude, you keep popping up from time to time to whine about the behavior of others with nary a clue as to your own intolerant, insulting, tough guy nonsensical rantings. You don't intimidate me with your misdirected, misguided bullsh*t one bit.


By the way, did you know that Fauxcahontas, Elizabeth Warren, not only practiced law in Massachusetts without a license but represented Dow Chemical (http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/10/elizabeth-warren-helped-protect-dow-chemical-against-breast-implant-claims/) in bankruptcy proceedings stemming from lawsuits filed by women suffering health effects from breast implants manufactured by Dow?

Paying off corporations to not warn employees of impending layoffs and working against women suffering from a bad product - yep, those Dems sure do fight for the little guy and women's body parts.

You threatening me, dude? +Threaten you? Nah DUDE! Because you all are so inflexible I like to tweak those blue noses every once in a while, It was fun down at the clinic and it's fun now. Why do you think excon's hanging in there? That's right dude! He's having fun with you. Can't I just join in for a jab or two? From your posts I got to be getting under your skin dude. That's why I keep popping in from time to time. Does your nose feel "tweaked"? Why does it look so blue? The speedster dude

+Threaten you? Nah DUDE! Because ya all are so inflexible I like to tweak those blue noses every once in a while, It was fun down at the clinic and it's fun now. Why do you think excon's hanging in there? That's right dude! he's having fun with you. Can't I just join in for a jab or two? From your posts I gotta be getting under your skin dude. That's why I keep popping in from time to time. Does your nose feel "tweaked"? Why does it look so blue? The speedster dude

Um, ex is a pretty good guy that I make mincemeat out of in fantasy baseball. You're just a pimple on a flea. But hey, if it makes you feel good being a big, tough legend in your own mind then good for you.

Implying that you wish to inflict injury on me? That's not tweaking, that crosses the line.

Hello again, Steve:

Not the stone age, Steve.. Get real... But, certainly back to the early 20th Century. You deny it, of course, but the Supreme Court is ONE vote away from overturning Roe v. Wade. If Romney is elected, he'll appoint two and maybe three Supreme Court Justices...

Now, YOU may believe that they'll UPHOLD Roe when they have the chance, but the rest of us haven't drunk that koolaid...

excon

As much as you like to hold up Roe V Wade as some kind of standard it has already been sidestepped so it's a lot of tado about nothing.

Since the morning after pill and its extended use of it the Roe V Wade argument is a thing of the past.

Hit a nerve did I?
Implying that you wish to inflict injury on me? That's not tweakin that crosses the line. please don't give you more importance then you'll ever possess. (Wanna take out a restraining order? Hire a bodyguard? Perhaps grow a pair?
Nah! I was referring to the protest line. I have nothing against you! Hurt you? Hell no! You're too much fun to play with. By the way did you ever manage to get the blue off that nose I tweaked? The Tweaker Dude

Hit a nerve did I? please don't give you more importance then you'll ever possess. (Wanna take out a restraining order? Hire a bodyguard? Perhaps grow a pair?
Nah! I was referring to the protest line. I have nothing against you! Hurt you? Hell no! You're too much fun to play with. By the way did you ever manage to get the blue off that nose I tweaked? The Tweaker Dude

You need help.

As much as you like to hold up Roe V Wade as some kind of standard it has already been sidestepped so its a lot of tado about nothing.

Since the morning after pill and its extended use of it the Roe V Wade argument is a thing of the past.

Tell that to Huckabee, Santorum,and Romney. They have all said they would repeal it. That and contraceptives are a NO NO!

You need help.
Those nice young men in those clean white coats, and their coming to take me away. Hee! Hee! Spreechless! I'd write you a nasty letter but they won't let me have an y sharp objects like a pencil. I'll leave you and Excon but

I'LL BE BACK DUDE when you least expect it. Speedy

Those nice young men in those clean white coats, and their coming to take me away. Hee! hee! Spreechless! I'd write you a nasty letter but they won't let me have an y sharp objects like a pencil. I'll leave you and Excon ...

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."
- Oscar Wilde

"Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go."
- Oscar Wilde
Leaving Steve?

Hello again,

Look, I can CLOSE this thread if I want.. I have POWER! They NEVER should have given me that..

So, settle down...

I want to ask my right wing friends to come clean... They say that NOBODY wants to repeal Roe. They say that I'm NUTS for even thinking it could happen.. They say I'm smoking stuff..

But, you KNOW Romney would appoint Scalia type Supreme Court Justices.. If you don't KNOW it, then I KNOW it for you.. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 79 and has cancer, for crying out loud. That's ONE liberal GONE. That's all the conservatives need to form a 5 to 4 majority EVEN if Kennedy votes with the liberals.

Once that occurs, on its own, and as it always does, the court will steer the cases it wants to hear to its doorstep. And, they'll STEER an abortion case into their lair. Of that, I have NO doubt. Once there, they'll OVERTURN Roe. If you DON'T believe that, you should RESIGN from the current events page...

excon

Hello again,

Look, I can CLOSE this thread if I want.. I have POWER! They NEVER should have given me that..

So, settle down...

Me settle down? Surely you jest.


I want to ask my right wing friends to come clean... They say that NOBODY wants to repeal Roe. They say that I'm NUTS for even thinking that could happen.. They say I'm smoking stuff..

But, you KNOW Romney would appoint Scalia type Supreme Court Justices.. If you don't KNOW it, then I KNOW it for you.. Ruth Bader Ginsberg is 79 and has cancer for crying out loud. That's ONE liberal GONE. That's all the conservatives need to form a 5 to 4 majority EVEN if Kennedy votes with the liberals.

Once that occurs, on its own, and as it always does, the court will steer the cases it wants to hear to its doorstep. And, they'll STEER an abortion case into their lair. Of that, I have NO doubt. Once there, they'll OVERTURN Roe. If you DON'T believe that, you should RESIGN from the current events page...

excon

And we thought the Obamacare mandate didn't stand a chance.

I have come clean, I don't believe Roe will ever be overturned. The only ones that even want to discuss Roe are you guys on the left... that and the mythical dog whistles like "basketball" and "golf." Can we move on past this silly war on wimmenses narrative?

I have come clean, I don't believe Roe will ever be overturned. The only ones that even want to discuss Roe are you guys on the left...Hello again, steve:

I didn't fart. You act like I did. I'm NOT drunk. The scenario I point out is NOT some weird conspiracy theory... It's a VERY LIKELY possibility if Romney is elected. Did I say very.. I was being mild. It's very, VERY likely. Why you WOULDN'T think so, is beyond me.

Unless, of course, that's because you really DO think that it'll happen and you're afraid if you admit it, it'll go away... You've never shied from a conversation before, why now?

excon

Unless, of course, that's because you really DO think that it'll happen and you're afraid if you admit it, it'll go away... You've never shied from a conversation before, why now??

excon

Because I've said my piece, I don't worry about Roe. Look, the whole point in saying we thought the mandate would be overturned is those justices that Republicans appoint don't always turn out to be so conservative now do they? Souter, O'Connor, Kennedy and now Roberts anyone? I just don't believe your conspiracy theory has any legs.

Because I've said my piece, I don't worry about Roe.Hello again, Steve:

You may have said your piece, but the rest of the country is discussing it. I'll leave you out, if you wish, but I detected yet another change last night in the every changing Republican position on abortion...

Ryan said, "the policy of a Romney administration is to oppose abortion with exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

He also said, that he didn't believe “unelected judges” should be able to make those decisions. He also suggested that elected officials at the state level should be the ones in charge of Row V Wade.

Now, it looks like to ME, that Ryan CONFIRMED, that if Romney is elected president, Roe is history. Maybe they won't even have to go the Supreme Court route... They BOTH support a personhood act. Right wingers in congress support a personhood act. That would ban abortion right there, and probably contraceptives too.

Now, you can keep looking the other way, but you're going to miss something.

Excon

I oppose abortion too, but I'm not pushing for the appeal of Roe and they said there would be no abortion legislation from them, which should include a personhood act. I'd be more concerned that a liberal majority would do things like eviscerate the first and second amendments for starters. I'd like to keep the constitution.

With Obama being the only candidate that wouldn't protect baby girls that survived an abortion, whose female staffers make less than their male counterparts, and now with Pelosi's PAC attacking our country's first female combat fighter pilot with a 'kitchen' ad I ask again who's really waging a war on women?

Z5AZletb4SI

Martha McSally responded of course...


“The fact that they use this theme of Martha McSally in a kitchen cooking up recipes is…overtly sexist and insulting to any woman, but it certainly doesn’t fit specifically with me,” she said in a phone interview. “For crying out loud, I served 26 years in the military. I was too busy shooting 30 mm out of my A-10 at the Taliban and al Qaeda to spend any time in a kitchen.”

Apparently even flying an A-10 in combat isn't enough to qualify a conservative as an authentic woman.

She flew an A-10 ? Awesome ! That is one kick-a** jet! I want to vote for her .

baby girls that survived an abortion
Do you have any stats to indicate how often this happens? Or stats for partial-birth abortions?

Do you have any stats to indicate how often this happens? Or stats for partial-birth abortions?

Isn't saving one child enough?

she flew an A-10 ? Awesome ! That is one kick-a** jet! I want to vote for her .

Damn straight, that is one kicka$$ jet...

1rGcn2XGr48

And they put her in the kitchen? She'd blow the hell out of the kitchen.

Isn't saving one child enough?
Is there even one to save?

Read the sworn testimony (http://www.jillstanek.com/Testimony%2C%20IL%20Senate%20Health%20%26%20Human% 20Services%2C%203-12-03.pdf) of Jill Stanek to the Illinois Senate Health & Human Services Committee on the bill Obama refused to support.

Or just ask this woman:

Woman who Survived Abortion Takes Obama to Task in New Ad (http://redalertpolitics.com/2012/08/29/woman-who-survived-abortion-takes-obama-to-task-in-new-ad/)

You don't just let babies die, not even one.

Woman who Survived Abortion Takes Obama to Task in New Ad (http://redalertpolitics.com/2012/08/29/woman-who-survived-abortion-takes-obama-to-task-in-new-ad/)

You don't just let babies die, not even one.
"Melissa is the survivor of a failed saline infusion abortion in 1977." (from her website) In which trimester? And why not sooner if it was a later trimester? Why is she after Obama about this ancient story? Most abortions now take place during the first trimester.

***ADDED*** She was at six months gestation according to the Ohio University website.

"Localizing her story, Ohden drew a clear comparison between her biological mother and most students today. She said that her mother was told by her own parents that she needed to have an abortion and, like so many others, felt like she had no other choices.

Born at only 2 lbs and 14 oz. Ohden said [the baby] was able to fit in the palm of a hand.

Compromised by the abortion attempt, she faced seizures, respiratory problems and blood transfusions before miraculously being sent home after only two months of hospitalization.

Ohden explained that saline abortions, which involve injecting a toxic, salt solution into the amniotic fluid surrounding the preborn child, are no longer performed because of their low success rate."

I am not impressed.

Obviously you did not read the sworn testimony. Regardless, I'm not surprised that like Obama you would refuse to support saving one baby's life.

Obviously you did not read the sworn testimony. Regardless, I'm not surprised that like Obama you would refuse to support saving one baby's life.
That "baby" died in 1977.

Hello Steve:

If a botched abortion results in a life birth, I support keeping the baby alive. I'm no murderer.. Does that make you feel better?

But, abortions aren't allowed if the baby is viable, so in the ordinary course of events, that wouldn't happen..

excon

As usual you guys left out a few facts,

FactCheck.org : Obama and 'Infanticide' (http://factcheck.org/2008/08/obama-and-infanticide/)


As originally proposed, the 2003 state bill, SB 1082, sought to define the term "born-alive infant" as any infant, even one born as the result of an unsuccessful abortion, that shows vital signs separate from its mother. The bill would have established that infants thus defined were humans with legal rights. It never made it to the floor; it was voted down by the Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired.


However, Obama has said several times that he would have supported the federal version of the bill, which passed by unanimous consent and which President Bush signed into law Aug. 5, 2002, because it could not be used to challenge the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision granting a legal right to abortion. On Aug. 16, the candidate repeated that again to David Brody of the Christian Broadcasting Network. He also prefaced his remarks with an attack on those who said he had misrepresented his position on the state bills, saying they were "lying."

Speechless Said,
You don't just let babies die, not even one. And Excon and I both agree, But Steve, Let's learn a new word a day. Today's word is FEE-TUSS Say it out loud because abortions don't kill bay-bees abortions terminate pregnancies along with then fetus. And if you take away that right from women you're seeking to control her medical decisions, I kind of warmed to old Steve when I found out he sparked a doobie or two. Sort of makes him seem a little looser. The one thing I learned working at the clinic is that while we focus on the women they focus on the unborn. They have all the answers EXCEPT what to do after she gives birth they aren't willing to fund programs to help unwed mothers unless it's a religious program. After 13 years I understand where they're coming from, I might not agree but I do understand, Regards, Tom

That "baby" died in 1977.

I asked you to read Jill's sworn testimony (http://www.jillstanek.com/Testimony%2C%20IL%20Senate%20Health%20%26%20Human% 20Services%2C%203-12-03.pdf), which was in 2003. Is it really that hard for you to consider that one infant born alive might deserve care?

I did read it, and have read it in the past. That hospital has changed its policy regarding doing abortions that late in a pregnancy (when a fetus could be viable).

And Excon and I both agree, But Steve, Let's learn a new word a day. Today's word is FEE-TUSS

Don't patronize me, a fetus is only a fetus before birth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetus). After that it's a newborn baby. Say, it BABY.

An abortion is not birth.

An abortion is not birth.

LOL, you're seriously going to take this line of reasoning? If it leaves the womb alive that's a birth. Eyes, nose, fingers, toes, brain, a beating heart... you kill that 'fetus.'

Wikipedia: "Birth (calving in livestock and some other animals, whelping in carnivorous mammals) is the act or process of bearing or bringing forth offspring."

Abortion is not "bearing" or "bringing forth." Therefore, going by what you are saying, every birth is also an abortion.

Sorry, but I cannot possibly take you seriously.

It makes perfect sense. If abortion = birth, then birth = abortion. Tell me how that doesn't work for you.

Speechless Said, And Excon and I both agree, But Steve, Let's learn a new word a day. Todays word is FEE-TUSS Say it out loud because abortions don't kill bay-bees abortions terminate pregnancies along with then fetus. And if you take away that right from women you're seeking to control her medical decisions, I kinda warmed to old Steve when I found out he sparked a doobie or two. Sorta makes him seem a little looser. The one thing I learned working at the clinic is that while we focus on the women they focus on the unborn. They have all the answers EXCEPT what to do after she gives birth they aren't willing to fund programs to help unwed mothers unless it's a religious program. After 13 years I understand where they're coming from, I might not agree but I do understand, Regards, Tom

I don't see you and Ex agreeing at all. He supports viability. It appears you do not. How is that the same ?

Even though the debate still rages, and opinions vary, the law of the land says abortions are legal in the first semester. Now many states conservatively governed have passed laws that add to that with all kinds of restriction. That's fine as long as they are legally done, but making viability at the moment of conception is a stretch since only two people can know that, and one is a doctor. IF you are smart enough to see one, but beyond all this moral stuff, its choice and family planning that becomes an economic issue with many who make up more than half the population.

Barefoot and pregnant is no joke, neither is not having some sort of support in a life threatening and life changing situation. The hypocrisy comes in when those that have the means to have choices and supports, deny the choice for others, and worse, when the choice is in the hands of those that never have to be pregnant in the first place.

Even more so hypocritical when its not your female you are denying choice to, nor your child that you made, and have NO intention to raise that child until they reach the age of maturity, and actively seek to erode and deny any type of support to mother and child.

So this viability is opinion and conjecture and is only as REAL as your intentions to step up and do the right thing to make sure a child is raised properly. If you are NOT willing to raise this child you choose to make others have, you should do like the rest of the irresponsible punks, and disappear, and stay the freak out of the way while real men do the right thing!

Funny how we regard the viability more important than the development until maturity, and that's as backward as it gets. Yeah defend the baby until it gets here then walk away.

How is that moral, or a viable acceptable course of action? Don't answer, because its NOT!

I just wonder why the VP outright lied in the debate about the mandate that violates religious institutions 1st amendment rights. It's their policy ,they own it .Why can't they just admit they are forcing religious institutions to pay for contraception and abortifacients for their employees ?
Are they ashamed of their policy ? Or is that just a deception like the Stupak compromise ,giving their followers who have moral objections an out ?

It makes perfect sense. If abortion = birth, then birth = abortion. Tell me how that doesn't work for you.

All the more reason not to take you seriously.

I just wonder why the VP outright lied in the debate about the mandate that violates religious institutions 1st amendment rights. It's their policy ,they own it .Why can't they just admit they are forcing religious institutions to pay for contraception and abortifacients for their employees ?
Are they ashamed of their policy ? or is that just a deception like the Stupak compromise ,giving their followers who have moral objections an out ?

We have had that debate.

Yes we have . VP Biden was opposed to the policy on religious grounds ;and mumbled a defense of the policy during the debate . It was easy to see that he had lost his energy to do the goody laughs and interuptions during that segment . That is because he was very uncomfortable supporting a policy that everyone knows he opposed for moral reasons.

Another major adm official ,Bill Daley also opposed the policy .When he lost the internal debate between him and the Valerie Jarret ,and Sebellius cabal of hardliners ,he had the integrity to resign.
This was a policy that violated the President's word to the Blue Dogs, who got suckered into voting for Obamacare .Many of them lost their seats in 2010 over their vote. Many more Dems in Congress will lose their seats next month for their support of the radical progressive policies of the President .

Many more Dems in Congress will lose their seats next month for their support of the radical progressive policies of the PresidentHello again, tom:

So, you think they'll elect, vaginal juice stops pregnancy, Todd Aiken?? You think, congress is 50% communist, Alan West will survive? How about Joe, won't pay child support, Walsh??

Nahhh... The dems might not take back the House, but they'll make gains. Those losers above will LOSE and Michelle Bachmann too.

In terms of Todd Aiken, I don't know WHY you guys don't learn... He's Sharron Angle all over again.. IF you HAD a chance to take the Senate, running an extreme right winger killed it for you again..

Excon

So Biden lied about not imposing his beliefs on others? Great spin Tom, we will see. Seems to me despite your 4 year war on this president, and all the tactics to undermine him, he still is running ahead of you guys and the right wing.

Another month and we see how repeal and replace (?) works in the 21st century.

I didn't put Akin out there, we're voting in a young gun Hispanic named Cruz.

You think there is a war on women you really should speak to Julia Gillard
http://m.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillards-man-problem-20121013-27jul.html

It would have nothing to do with the fact that she is a radical lefty flake ?

it would have nothing to do with the fact that she is a radical lefty flake ?

No when they call you Juliar and the wicked witch how could it, these traints aren't confined to the left, however she now thinks all her opponents are mysoginst. She could be right most of the country hate her

Hello again,

While the REST of the country is talking about Roe v Wade being overturned (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/opinion/if-roe-v-wade-goes.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121016), our resident right wingers would rather look the other way... They think I'm bonkers for bringing it up.

That's fine.. It leaves the playing field to ME... And, to ME, it's CLEAR that if Romney wins, Roe is toast..

My support of Roe has LESS to do with whether abortion is right or wrong, but whether it can be controlled. I say, that no matter WHAT you write down in your lawbooks, if some lady WANTS an abortion, she'll get one... Rich ladies will travel to where they're legal, and poor ladies will seek back alley ones...

I don't know WHY you'd want to condemn ladies to that. Ok. Yes, I do.. You'll just DENY that it's happening.

excon

The NY Slimes editorial board is the rest of the country ? That op-ed is just a desperate attempt for OFA to counter their reverses in the so called gender gap. They are finding out that women are more concerned with the jobs their families have lost ,with the jobs their new graduate children don't have ,than whether some life time activist student at Georgetown can get a free contraception pill.

Here's a thought for you . Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided (because there is more than one person's health involved ) on the premise that health care decisions like abortion are a private matter and government has only limited authority to intervene in private health care decisions. Obamacare on the other hand is based on a philosophy that there is no right to privacy in health care. Government can control what health care people can obtain ;and can mandate health care decisions .

You want to talk about health care privacy ? Obamacare requires that all medical files be submitted and maintained in a federal database.The court just upheld a reversal in the concept of health care privacy. It is your side that is eroding health care "choice " . I'm going under the premise that if Roe is overturned ,that the Obamacare decision gave the justices the rationale and precedent to make that call .

Further the expanded power of the Sec HHS can also work both ways. Imagine a DHHS czar saying that abortion coverage is prohibitted . If they can force churches to provide contraceptives ,the next adm can equally deny coverage.

Hello again, tom:

I can't tell exactly, but it LOOKS like you agree with me. If Romney is elected, Roe is dead.

excon

I can only go by Romney's past. I was opposed to him in the primaries to a large degree because of his prior abortion positions. Do I think a guy who made sure that abortions were available and subsidized in Mass .would move to kill Roe ?

That back alley abortion thing is for the most part, a myth. But I understand, your whole strategy is based on mythical fears.

That back alley abortion thing is for the most part, a myth. But I understand, your whole strategy is based on mythical fears.
I was a teen during the '50s and '60s when girls my age suffered and even died from self-induced and back-alley abortions. They were trying to hide pregnancies from their church-going parents. Once the parents found out, if the daughter was still pregnant, she was quietly shipped off to "Aunt Melba" in Nebraska.

Hello again, tom:

Mitt Romney said Tuesday he has no plans to push for legislation limiting abortion, a softer stance from a candidate who has said he would "get rid of" funding for Planned Parenthood and appoint Supreme Court Justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.. . “There's no legislation with regards to abortion that I'm familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” the Republican presidential nominee told The Des Moines Register in an interview.

The Romney campaign walked back the remark within two hours of the Register posting its story. Spokeswoman Andrea Saul told the National Review Online's Katrina Trinko that Romney "would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life."

I agree that he's flipped flopped so many times on the issue, that you have NO idea what his REAL position is.. But, as I explained before, he doesn't have to DO anything other than appoint a conservative justice, and a case will work its way to their doorstep on it's OWN accord.

excon

That back alley abortion thing is for the most part, a myth. Really?
When you pull your head out of the sand simply click your heels three times and say, "Take me back to the real world".
You might too young to remember but back in the 60 you could stand near the back door of the doctors office on a Sunday and get high off the ether fumes as he performed abortions. And if Mit has his way we will be jerked back in time to the "coathanger" days.
Is that what you REALLY want? Regards, Tom

I agree that he's flipped flopped so many times on the issue, that you have NO idea what his REAL position is.. But, as I explained before, he doesn't have to DO anything other than appoint a conservative justice, and a case will work its way to their doorstep on it's OWN accord.

Excon
And I go by the position that actions speak louder than words. Under Romneycare abortion was legal ,and covered with a modest $50 copay . He used the courts to circumvent parental consent .

But if he does appoint a consevative judge ;and a case makes it's way to SCOTUS ,and if by some strange circumstance SCOTUS overturns Roe... you won't see me mourning the decision.You can blame the Obamacare case for the precedent that gave them the opening .

I was a teen during the '50s and '60s when girls my age suffered and even died from self-induced and back-alley abortions.

Give me stats. Real ones.

Give me stats. Real ones.
You know darn well there aren't any. No one talked out loud about stuff like that back then. It was a family secret.

Give me stats. Real ones. Sarasota Fl. 1965.
Dr, Wiel King. Sentenced to 50 years for running a "pill mill" and performing illegal abortions.
That's the doctor I mentioned in my other post. Convinced? Tom

"In the 1930s, licensed physicians performed an estimate 800,000 abortions a year." Boyer, Ed. By Paul S. (2006). The Oxford companion to United States history. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. pp. 3. ISBN 978-0-19-508209-8.

Really?
When you pull your head out of the sand simply click your heels three times and say, "Take me back to the real world".
You might too young to remember but back in the 60 you could stand near the back door of the doctors office on a Sunday and get high off the ether fumes as he performed abortions. And if Mit has his way we will be jerked back in time to the "coathanger" days.
Is that what you REALLY want? Regards, GTom

Dude, even before Roe the majority of abortions were done by licensed physicians in good standing.


An illegal abortion may be called a "back-alley", "backstreet", or "back-yard" abortion.

The wire coat hanger method was a popularly known illegal abortion procedure, although they were not the norm. In fact, Mary Calderone, former medical director of Planned Parenthood, said, in a 1970 printing of the American Journal of Public Health:

"Abortion is no longer a dangerous procedure. This applies not just to therapeutic abortions as performed in hospitals but also to so-called illegal abortions as done by physician (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unsafe_abortion#Illegal_abortion). In 1957 there were only 260 deaths in the whole country attributed to abortions of any kind, second, and even more important, the conference [on abortion sponsored by Planned Parenthood] estimated that 90 percent of all illegal abortions are presently being done by physicians. Whatever trouble arises usually arises from self-induced abortions, which comprise approximately 8 percent, or with the very small percentage that go to some kind of non-medical abortionist. Abortion, whether therapeutic or illegal, is in the main no longer dangerous, because it is being done well by physicians."

Legalizing abortion "had no major impact on the number of women dying from abortion" according to the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology in 1978.

That's the real world.

"In the 1930s, licensed physicians performed an estimate 800,000 abortions a year."

Exactly, licensed physicians... just like I said above.

Dude, even before Roe the majority of abortions were done by licensed physicians in good standing.
By 1900 abortion was largely illegal in every state. Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973.

Women knew which doctors were willing to do abortions after hours. My mother was furious when my sister choose as her baby doctor a man who had been doing illegal abortions before 1973.

There are no statistics on self-induced abortions.

Hello Carol:

There's NO proving this to Steve.. It's a MYTH. That is what he believes... Just like he believes that NOBODY dies in this country because they don't have health insurance, and they really don't bust pot smokers.. According to him, those are myths too.. He'll NEVER believe otherwise.

Right wingers LOVE their rose colored glasses..

excon

Hello Carol:

There's NO proving this to Steve.. It's a MYTH. That is what he believes... Just like he believes that NOBODY dies in this country because they don't have health insurance.. According to him, that's a myth too. He'll NEVER believe otherwise.

Right wingers LOVE their rose colored glasses..

excon
Dear excon:

Are you telling me to give up?

Adoringly,
WG

Hello again, Carol:

I'm suggesting that you post to the world ABOUT the wrongheadedness of his positions. He's the perfect foil.

Lovingly, excon

Sheesh, get a room.

You guys are the ones fear mongering over something you can't back up. I posted what is known by sources you should approve, Planned Parenthood and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - not some right to life group. Carol even affirmed my argument that most [illegal -ed. By WG] abortions were performed by licensed physicians.

Are you seriously going to argue that 90 percent of our doctors are quacks that wouldn't follow the same standard of care "after hours" they did during during business hours?

Steve

P.S. There is nothing "wrongheaded" about trying to save a child's life.

There is something wrong headed by telling a female or anyone else that YOUR choice should be hers only choice!

There is something wrong headed by telling a female or anyone else that YOUR choice should be hers only choice!

Considering I have never told anyone any such thing that's just one more myth shot down. Ironically though you seem to have no problem telling religious employers that your choice is the only choice.

Are you seriously going to argue that 90 percent of our doctors are quacks that wouldn't follow the same standard of care "after hours" they did during during business hours? Hello again, Steve:

That would depend on how many years in the slam they're risking. My take is that they won't risk ANY. What? You're not going to attach a PENALTY for breaking the law? I know, let's put the women in the slam. What's appropriate for murder?

Therefore, since I don't think ANY doctor in good standing is going to risk it, the only ones who WILL are the ones who AREN'T in good standing... I.E. The back alley guys.

Excon

You guys are the ones fear mongering over something you can't back up. I posted what is known by sources you should approve, Planned Parenthood and the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology - not some right to life group. Carol even affirmed my argument that most [illegal -ed. by WG] abortions were performed by licensed physicians.

Are you seriously going to argue that 90 percent of our doctors are quacks that wouldn't follow the same standard of care "after hours" they did during during business hours?

Steve

P.S. There is nothing "wrongheaded" about trying to save a child's life.
"Most" is incorrect. Those were illegal abortions and were not always done in sterile conditions, were done by sleazier doctors and in their offices/treatment rooms, often with no assistance. As for the "most," we have no clue how many were done by girls and women alone in their bedrooms/bathrooms.

Back then, women and girls figured they would die during or after an abortion or a botched abortion. Infection was a huge problem.

Let's review. I said that back-alley abortion thing is mostly a myth, meaning there were not tons and tons of women suffering and/or dying from using coat hangers and such. The facts we have say that roughly 9 out of 10 of those abortions were performed by licensed physicians and that legalizing abortion had no major impact on the number of women that died from an abortion.

So when you argue we're going "back" to those days there you go, 9 out of 10 doctors were obviously quacks with no regard for sterile conditions after hours according to your 'logic.'

I have a different take on what benefits women. I do not think Obama's agenda items are really that good for women. I also do not think it's the federal government's role to provide them in any event.

I believe, rather, that we all should be responsible for our own reproduction. Sex is optional, pregnancy is 100% preventable. There seems to be a belief that if birth control is free, it will solve all our reproductive problems. Not so. Birth control is already quite cheap - if a person can afford a bottle of pop, they can buy a condom. If they can afford a case of pop, they can afford a months' supply of the pill. This idea that affordability is the driving factor behind women getting pregnant when they can't support a child is a myth. Women will find a way to pay for birth control if they are of a mindset to use it. So will men.

Birth control is also not inocuous, nor is abortion. Both dramatically impact the woman's body and they are not medically necessary in most cases. When they are, they should be prescribed and covered as medical treatments and covered as such. For example, tubal surgery for an ectopic pregnancy is medically necessary to save the life of the mother - it should be treated as a medical procedure, not an abortion. The intention is not to terminate the pregnancy but to save the mother. On the other hand, an abortion because someone got drunk and slept with their boyfriend - not medically necessary, poses risk to the mother, poses almost certain emotional devastation. Not necessarily the right thing to do, regardless of your moral values about abortion. Taking responsibility for it seems to me to be the right thing for that woman and her partner to do, including the bill. It is not, however, my responsibility to pay for their behavior.

Whatever money the government gives free to someone has to be earned by and then taken from someone else. We need to have some high standards when we decide that our neighbor should buy things for us.

It's a philosophical difference about the role of government and the role of individuals. I personally think, for example, it's more caring to hold people accountable - particularly adults - than to bail them out of their self-made messes. The bail-out can be a trap, and prevention of learning.

The best social programs are education and jobs - they benefit all of us. I'd like our government to focus on creating an environment where these things can thrive, which includes cutting some of these school unions down to size when they become overly burdensome to the tax payers.

There is no such thing as free contraceptions since you are paying a monthly or bi monthly PREMIUM for a contracted benefit from a private company.

Some of us pay no premium... yet. Still you're OK with not giving religious employers a choice.

Spewechless is saying,
There is nothing "wrongheaded" about trying to save a child's life. And I agree 100%. And now we have to define what old Speechless Dude meant by "child" If I saw a child playing in the street I'd stop traffic and pick him up. If I saw a child in trouble in a swimming pool I'd jump in and pull him out. Old Dude couldn't be referring to abortion because at no time are children involved. Good thought speechless! Perhaps you should try saving disadvantaged children instead of attempting to control a woman's medical decision. Might even make the world a better place, Tom

Some of us pay no premium...yet. Still youre ok with not giving religious employers a choice.

Most employee based health insurance requires a deduction for health insurance, tellme more about yours.

The distinction of fact is the EMPLOYER aspect you acknowledge as employees have taxes, and rights that their EMPLOYER cannot take away.

Do you expect employees to give up heir rights and obligations to work for a church?

Most employee based health insurance requires a deduction for health insurance, tellme more about yours.

The distinction of fact is the EMPLOYER aspect you acknowledge as employees have taxes, and rights that their EMPLOYER cannot take away.

Do you expect employees to give up heir rights and obligations to work for a church?

No one EVER had a right to contraceptive coverage from their employer in this country. You can't take away something you never had.

And I agree 100%. And now we have to define what old Speechless Dude meant by "child" If I saw a child playing in the street I'd stop traffic and pick him up. If I saw a child in trouble in a swimming pool I'd jump in and pull him out. Old Dude couldn't be referring to abortion because at no time are children involved. Good thought speechless! Perhaps you should try saving disadvantaged children instead of attempting to control a woman's medical decision. Might even make the world a better place, Tom

We've had this discussion, I think it's great idea to help children inside and outside the womb. It's a baby, it's always been a baby - no one but some pro-choicer would run around telling her friends she's having a fetus.

No one EVER had a right to contraceptive coverage from their employer in this country. You can't take away something you never had.

And the church has no right to tell private business how they do their business. Or government how to govern.

Now therein lies the problem because someone has to tell them, their record indicates very poor performance

The real problem is the Dems grasping at straw. Women in this country are concerned about jobs for themselves and their families . They worry about paying the weekly grocery bill . They are not worried about a full time student activist's ability to get contraception ,or this fanciful notion that if Romney is elected that abortions will be illegal.

Those women will REALLY have to worry about the grocery bill if abortions become illegal!

some pro-choicer would run around telling her friends she's having a fetus. But that's exactly what's inside the womb until it comes out. That's what I keep calling you on. It's not a BAY-BEE, It's not a CHILD, In fact and in truth it is a fetus both medically and legally. You lifers try like hell to make it something it's not. And then get angry because it doesn't work for you. We don't shoot up and bomb people you all do, Tom

First of all Tommy Boy I don't shoot up and bomb anyone, nor does any pro-life group so you can toss that straw man aside. I bet more women have died from legal abortion mills than abortionists killed by wackos. Secondly, you avoided the point. No one I know of brags about having a fetus, they get excited because they're having a baby. But I know how it with you leftists, you always want it both ways. Just like Tal telling the "it's my way or the highway" while arguing that view is wrong.

During both of my pregnancies, the medical people always referred to my "babies" as fetuses.

"I going to have a baby."

But that's exactly what's inside the womb until it comes out. That's what I keep calling you on. It's not a BAY-BEE, It's not a CHILD, In fact and in truth it is a fetus both medically and legally. You lifers try like hell to make it something it's not. And then get angry because it doesn't work for you. We don't shoot up and bomb people you all do, Tom

Maybe you spoke too soon?

Laws and policies

The Unborn Victims of Violence Act, passed in 2004, defines a fetus as a "child in uterus" and a person as being a legal crime victim "if a fetal injury or death occurs during the commission of a federal violent crime."[8] In the U.S. 36 states have laws with more harsh penalties if the victim is murdered while pregnant. Some of these laws defining the fetus as being a person, "for the purpose of criminal prosecution of the offender" (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2008). Laci Peterson, murdered in 2002, is one of the more high-profile homicides.

Currently in the North Carolina Senate, a bill called the SB 353 Unborn Victims of Violence Act is being considered for legislation that would create a separate criminal offense for the death of a fetus when the mother is murdered. The North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence does not support this law for numerous reasons including failure to see violence against the mother as the cause of the fetal death.[9] The Coalition does, however, support the position of the National Network to End Domestic Violence regarding the Unborn Victims of Violence Act.[citation needed]



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_pregnant_women

Hello again,

The women I know have the ability to consider TWO thoughts at once... Certainly, they're worried about jobs. That DOESN'T mean, of course, that they're not also worried about their vaginas, and how Mitt is going to deal with them.

excon

Ex, please, we don't need those images being put in our head

Hello again, clete:

Don't they say vagina over there?

excon

Hello again,

The women I know have the ability to consider TWO thoughts at once... Certainly, they're worried about jobs. That DOESN'T mean, of course, that they're not also worried about their vaginas, and how Mitt is going to deal with them.

excon

Yeah one real issue ,and one ginned up phony issue.

Hello again, tom:


yeah one real issue ,and one ginned up phony issue.Maybe if your state legislature were proposing a law that required a probe to be stuck way up inside you, for NO earthly medical reason, you'd feel different about the issue...

Excon

And that's a phony issue, no one is requiring a probe. We've had that talk.

Hello again, Steve;


And that's a phony issue, no one is requiring a probe.Yeah, it's another one of those myths you've been telling us about. I guess the state of Virginia (http://jezebel.com/5886102/law-forcing-abortion-seekers-to-have-vaginal-probe-totally-ok-since-theyve-already-been-penetrated) didn't hear about it..

Bwa, ha ha ha..

Excon

I don't shoot up and bomb anyone, nor does any pro-life group so you can toss that straw man aside.
DON'T YOU DARE set behind the safety of your computer and tell me that there has been no clinic violence.
In the thirteen years I was head of security and chief escort for The Sarasota Women's Health Clinic I've been attacked four times, shot at twice, went through two bomb scares and had two Anthrex letter delivered to the clinic. The first one we opened in the office and got white powder all over us. It took HazMat three days to test the powder and tell us it was flour. Can you imagine what setting out those three days was like?
We went through a full invasion where they arrested a hundred protesters for criminal . Trespass.
So don't you dare tell me there's no clinic violence. How many doctors have been shot by the pro-life movement? It's easy to set behind the safety of your computer and pronounce judgment but I was there. I lived the violence while all you do is punch a few keys and talk about things you know nothing about, Don't you dare to presume to tell me what it was like out there because you have no idea just how bad it was out there.! Tom

DON'T YOU DARE set behind the safety of your computer and tell me that there has been no clinic violence.

Since you love condescension repeat after me, Steve did not now or ever say there has been no clinic violence.

Pay attention Speedy and keep it relevant, you accused our side of shooting up and bombing people. MY side does no such thing. No one on MY side endorses, approves of or engages in clinic violence, criminal trespass, shooting, bombing, sending anthrax or whatever. Whatever people you're referring to are not MY side. MY side is peaceful, MY side engages in such militant tactics as prayer, persuasion and compassion.

Yes, there are wackos, I believe I called them wackos and they do stupid, vile, hateful, criminal, inexcusable things. I am not on their side nor are the vast majority of pro-life people, we detest these people as much as you do if not more, got it?

You've been there, I get it and don't discount your experience. I've been there, too... on the other side, mourning with women living in a personal hell because of the self-imposed guilt they felt in aborting their child, one of which is my daughter. Don't discount my experience either, I have real and valid personal reasons for hating abortion in seeing the damage it's done to others and knowing I will never hold my grandchild. We can't talk or you can just hide behind your keyboard and keep throwing out bullsh!t, kneejerk responses, your choice.

Yeah, it's another one of those myths you've been telling us about. I guess the state of Virginia didn't hear about it..


We had that conversation, the law does not require any probe no matter how much you lefties protest.

Steve did not now or ever say there has been no clinic violence.
Oh yeah? Then what's this all about? I don't shoot up and bomb anyone, nor does any pro-life group so you can Atoss that straw man aside If you call yourself Pro-Life then you just can't tap dance away from responsibility. As you say, there my be wackos out there shooting and bombing but they're your wackos They are as much to do with the pro-life movement as you.

mourning with women living in a personal hell because of the self-imposed guilt they felt in aborting their child Oh! Am I glad you brought that out.
GUILT is one of the major weapons you people use. Who makes them feel guilty for walking into a clinic? Why you people do. You have laying a guilt trip down on a girl to a fine art. I had a feeling that you were a protester. You have that mind set. Abortions are down now. Nt because of any thing the pro-life movement has done. Abortions are down because of " The Pill".
So Steve, you can bleat about how righteous you are and how you pray outside of clinics but I know you people I've seen what you can do and I'm glad I walked away after thirteen years with my life. You see they kill escorts as well as doctors. Care to tap dance away from that? Tippity-tap! Tom

Steve did not now or ever say there has been no clinic violence.


Oh yeah? Then what's this all about? I don't shoot up and bomb anyone, nor does any pro-life group so you can toss that straw man aside If you call yourself Pro-Life then you just can't tap dance away from responsibility n as you say, there my by wackos out there shooting and bombing but they're your wackos They are as much to do with the pro-life movement as you.

Listen up shorty, you tell me which ORGANIZED pro-life group bombs and shoots people. None, nada, zero, zilch. But once again your side show how they want it both ways, I'm sure YOU want to distance yourself from the haters that want to assassinate Romney (http://twitchy.com/2012/10/14/death-threats-against-mitt-romney-proliferate/) but using your logic you area as much to do with these haters they are.


Quote:
Mourning with women living in a personal hell because of the self-imposed guilt they felt in aborting their child


Oh! Am I glad you brought that out.
GUILT is one of the major weapons you people use.

Do you even bother to read before erupting at the mouth? There is a hyphenated word in there you missed, self-imposed (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/self-imposed). You also conveniently ignored the word "compassion." But I get it, you aren't interested in talking just as I suspected, you just want to reflexively foam at the mouth.

Tippty-Tap Tippty-tap! Gee! It's fun to watch you bob and weave as you distance yourself away from the wackos in your movement, You're a fun guy,

Do you even bother to read before erupting at the mouth? There is a hyphenated word in there you missed, self-imposed. You also conveniently ignored the word "compassion." But I get it, you aren't interested in talking just as I suspected, you just want to reflexively foam at the mouth If that's the best you can do,correct my grammar and spelling?
If that's so then you're out of gas. You can rave on about how righteous you people are and how much praying you do and some folk might even believe that's all you do. But you made a big mistake. You came up against a guy who was there and saw. Your mistake! I said some time ago I wish I'd had you out in front of my clinic. You can't keep your mouth shut and with all the shouting and milling about if you would have put one foot inside my compound it would have been my pleasure to introduce you to The Florida Court system and The Sarasota City Jail. Too bad we never met. Tom

Dude, there's no bobbing and weaving on my part, I am rock solid steady and focused. You're scattering shots at everything except what I've actually said.


P.S. This fantasizing about getting your grubby little paws on me is really starting to get creepy. You might want to seek counseling for that, it can't be healthy.

Well Romney isn't waging a war on women he has "binders full of them", suggesting they are falling over themselves to serve with him. What an ego, it's a wonder his head doesn't explode

Well Romney isn't waging a war on women he has "binders full of them", suggesting they are falling over themselves to serve with him. What an ego, it's a wonder his head doesn't explode

Yes it was a goofy comment but I'm quite sure he meant binders full of female prospects for cabinet positions. That was the subject, diversifying his cabinet.


"I had the chance to pull together a Cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men," he said. "I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women."

My question would be why are women's groups keeping women in binders?

Hello again, Steve:


My question would be why are women's groups keeping women in binders?My question would be WHY doesn't he know any qualified women. I also wonder WHY he has to ask Ann about what women think.

As a liberal AND a businessman, I KNOW qualified women, and I KNOW what women think.

Excon

Ask Me Help Desk - View Single Post - Who's winning?? (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/3300365-post264.html)

Romney has already been shown a liar (with a straight face), and the resumes were compiled and given to Romney by a group promoting females in executive government positions.

Of course he played along,and abandoned the ideas of MASSGAP after a while.

My question would be WHY doesn't he know any qualified women. I also wonder WHY he has to ask Ann about what women think.

As a liberal AND a businessman, I KNOW qualified women, and I KNOW what women think.

Uh huh. I've determined that if you libs would acknowledge facts instead of trying to drive wedges in where they don't belong we could get along a lot better.

Just like Bush's cabinet was more diverse than Obama's, Romney's cabinet as governor puts you libs to shame (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/18/romney-cabinets-women-representation-better-than-leading-democratic-governors/).

But why did he have to lie and say it was his idea and not that he was approached by an advocacy group like all the othe Massachusetts candidates? Why do that?

But why did he have to lie and say it was his idea and not that he was approached by an advocacy group like all the othe Massachusetts candidates? Why do that?

There is no lie, he initiated the effort and then carried it out. I gave you the quote (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/war-women-662145-64.html#post3300938):



"I had the chance to pull together a Cabinet, and all the applicants seemed to be men," he said. "I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks?' and they brought us whole binders full of women."

My question is when will the Obama White House follow the Lilly Bedwetter Fair Pay Act? The median annual salary for female White House employees was 18% less than male employees... $60,000 compared with $71,000.

I also want to know why the President runs a White House that is a hostile work environment for women according to former White House communications director and Mao Tse-tung fan Anita Dunn .
Why is the President waging war on women?

Been asking that question for months myself.

By the way ex, you called Allen West a loser in his race. Well, not so good news for you...

Allen West, Patrick Murphy congressional race: West has 9 point lead over Murphy in new poll (http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/political/allen-west-patrick-murphy-congressional-race-west-has-9-point-lead-over-murphy-in-new-poll#ixzz29kqZgxVM)

Hello again, Steve:

Well, OBVIOUSLY, the poll is rigged...

excon

There is no lie, he initiated the effort and then carried it out. I gave you the quote (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/war-women-662145-64.html#post3300938):

That's the LIE Speech, he didn't iniate the effort at all, he and other candidates approached him. He knew he initiated nothing.


My question is when will Obama White House follow the Lilly Bedwetter Fair Pay Act? The median annual salary for female White House employees was 18% less than male employees ....$60,000 compared with $71,000.

I also want to know why the President runs a White House that is a hostile work environment for women according to former White House communications director and Mao Tse-tung fan Anita Dunn .
Why is the President waging war on women?

Equal work for equal pay, so prove that the averages may be different but the pay is not the same. Should I give you a link AGAIN as to what levels of staff get what level of pay?

I have also provided a link for the Dunn statement if you had bothered to read it.

That's the LIE Speech, he didn't iniate the effort at all, he and other candidates approached him. He knew he initiated nothing.

What the heck are you talking about? You're making no sense whatsoever, Tal.

Romney spun his comments about hiring women to make it look like it was his idea when in fact it was MASSGAP who approached him and his opponent and other state candidates in Massechusets lobbying for more females to be appointed.

That's the LIE, he initiated nothing.

And so he pledged then actively sought out women after he won. Misleading maybe, a lie, no. Unlike POTUS who has great difficulty keeping any promise, he did what he said he would do.

Did Romney support Lily Ledbetter? Or did he support the BLUNT bill?

What the heck are you talking about? You're making no sense whatsoever, Tal.


Tal is actually correct.

The way the sentences are constructed Romney didn't bring us any binders full of women. It was the women's groups that did the bringing.

The clumsy grammar is actually at the end of the Romney quote. In fact the three quotes provide in the article are grammatically poor.

Tut

Obama is only interested in votes, Romney actually made good on his promise to women.

Obama is only interested in votes, Romney actually made good on his promise to women.

My comment wasn't actually directed at one individual.The three quotes provided are in fact from three individuals.

Making good policy decisions is not going to win him enough votes. He needs to create more anxiety.

Tut

Obama is only interested in votes, Romney actually made good on his promise to women.
The exact opposite is true.

R want to get us women home from work in time to make dinner for the family--and to give foot rubs to the master.

The exact opposite is true.

R want to get us women home from work in time to make dinner for the family--and to give foot rubs to the master.

So is that why he hired so many women as governor, to give foot rubs and cook dinner?

Again you show why I can't take you seriously.

Sadly his record is not as you say it is:

Axelrod: Romney record on hiring women at Bain 'poor' - The Hill's Video (http://thehill.com/video/campaign/262719-axelrod-romney-record-on-hiring-women-at-bain-poor-)

Fact check: Romney (http://www.boston.com/politicalintelligence/2012/10/16/fact-check-romney-record-hiring-women/r3gqpykaQudNNqigmLZfuJ/story.html)

As Governor, Romney's Eagerness to Hire Women Faded - NYTimes.com (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/as-governor-romneys-eagerness-to-hire-women-faded/)

Romney's Record On 'Binders Full Of Women' | Here & Now (http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/10/18/romney-binders-women)

Wonder why he didn't run for re election?

Wonder why he didn't run for re election?

Because he ran for President.

Good thing he's rich. I don't think he will be successful this time either.

Hello again, tal:

The right wing doesn't believe there IS a war on women. That's why Romney is trying to COUNTER it with his new push for women... Yeah, I know... Doesn't make sense..

So, if the right wing can believe there's NO war on women, they can CERTAINLY convince themselves that Romney is very PRO women...

But, THAT is entirely NUTS. We don't want a NUT in the Whitehouse... I didn't like Bush.. But, he wasn't NUTS!

excon

That is another well worn out talking point of the left... "the last Repubic wasn't crazy like this one is ":

Mitts 5 point plan is the same one GWB had, and his advisors are neocons from the Bush administration. He is more aggressive, less funny, and suffers from Romnesia.

You tell me the difference!

At least of the 112 justices on the SCOTUS, 4 have been women and half have been appointed by Obama. Ya think Mitt has a binder for that?

Were they the most qualified ;or were they part of a quota system ? Did Obama find them in a binder ?

They were confirmed by the senate, so why does it matter?

Elena Kagan Supreme Court nomination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elena_Kagan_Supreme_Court_nomination)

63-37

Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court nomination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonia_Sotomayor_Supreme_Court_nomination)

68-31

Bi partisan agreement! What more could you ask for?

I honestly still have to laugh at the thought of a right-wing war on women. The idea is absurd. You guys sound like 3rd graders.

P.S. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/19/fox-news-poll-romney-now-ahead-in-florida/)

a fox news poll of Florida likely voters shows republican nominee mitt romney now tops barack obama in the battleground state by 48 percent to 45 percent.

The poll, released Friday, shows an eight-point reversal and a four-point increase for romney. Last month, he trailed obama by 44-49 percent (september 16-18, 2012)…

Consider this: Obama tops romney by one percentage point among women now, down from a 19-point edge last month. and romney has extended his advantage among married women to 13 points, up from a seven-point edge.

Obviously the war on women thingy is working.

Hello again, Steve:

Those stats tell me the war on women IS working just fine, from your point of view. Right doesn't always prevail.

excon

But in this case it does, there's nothing right about a phony war on women.

You can't see a war because you are just protecing the unborn child. Whether its wanted or NOT, but yet like a dead beat dad, your party seeks to make sure a female gets NO help and support for the choice you force her to make.

You can't see a war because you are just protecing the unborn child. Whether its wanted or NOT, but yet like a dead beat dad, your party seeks to make sure a female gets NO help and support for the choice you force her to make.

Wrong, Tal. No one wants to leave a woman helpless. Support comes in more forms than just giving her justification for abortion.

Support comes in more forms than just giving her justification for abortion.
Please list all the forms.

Please list all the forms.

Have you never heard of a crisis pregnancy center (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1590444,00.html#ixzz2A7xwUD00)?


The pregnancy-center clinic, with its new ultrasound machine, has been open only since December, but already the staff can count the women who came in considering an abortion and changed their minds: five women converted, six lives saved, they declare, since one was carrying twins. "They connected," nurse Joyce Wilson says, recalling the reaction of the women who saw the filmy image of their fetus onscreen. "They bonded. You could just see it. One girl got off the table and said, 'That's my baby.'"

"Another got up," Deborah Wood says, "and said, 'This changes everything.'"

Wood is the CEO of Asheville Pregnancy Support Services in Asheville, North Carolina, one of the thousands of crisis pregnancy centers in the U.S. that are working to end abortion. Hers is the new face of an old movement: kind, calm, nonjudgmental, a special-forces soldier in the abortion wars who is fighting her battles one conscience at a time. Her center helps women navigate the social-service bureaucracy, sign up for Medicaid and begin prenatal care. She helps pregnant girls find emergency housing if their parents threaten to throw them out. Free pregnancy tests and ultrasounds are just the latest service.

I've had enough of this lie: "Whether its wanted or NOT, but yet like a dead beat dad, your party seeks to make sure a female gets NO help and support for the choice you force her to make."

We give plenty of help to women in need; it's just not the kind the pro-choice side wants, unfettered taxpayer funded access to abortion - with or without parental permission for minors, teaching PP's sex ed programs, forcing the church to buy contraceptives, etc.

We not only help them out of our own time and money to get what help they need, they get compassion, hope, understanding and most importantly, unconditional LOVE. Don't tell me a woman doesn't want to be loved.

Have you never heard of a crisis pregnancy center?

Not until now:

'Choose life' to fund centers | CharlotteObserver.com (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/23/2715553/choose-life-on-state-plates.html)

NARAL says it found the majority of the centers it investigated in North Carolina had no medical professionals on staff, and only a quarter of them disclosed they were not medical facilities. More than two-thirds provided distorted or false information about abortion risks and consequences.

The report says one Jewish investigator who posed as a pregnant woman was told at five centers she wouldn't go to heaven unless she converted to Christianity, and that one volunteer challenged her to become a "born-again virgin."


Feminist Campus - Campaign to Expose Fake Clinics (http://www.feministcampus.org/act/cpc/default.asp)

San Francisco Tells Crisis Pregnancy Centers to Stop Lying to Women | The Stir (http://thestir.cafemom.com/healthy_living/124069/san_francisco_tells_crisis_pregnancy)

Christian Pregnancy Crisis Clinics Exposed - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iLrmjkuOTDk)

UCLA Student Exposes The False "Options" Of Crisis Pregnancy Centers (http://jezebel.com/5295333/ucla-student-exposes-the-false-options-of-crisis-pregnancy-centers)

Dude, I could just as easily post far worse info about Planned Parenthood and NARAL is hardly an unbiased voice I'd go to for the scoop on pro-life groups.

I don't know anything about "anti-abortion clinics" but I am well familiar with respected crisis pregnancy centers. But leave it to you to demean the idea of giving women not only the support they need that Tal claims we don't offer, but love and compassion in the process.

respected crisis pregnancy centersApparently they are anything but "respected". I see no love and compassion but instilling guilt using deception during a difficult period in a woman's life. Shame of them for their bait and switch techniques.

Have you never heard of a crisis pregnancy center?
Need Karma nailed it! Way ta go Karma! We had several in Sarasota that specialized in guilt trips, "You're going to Hell if you abort." _You're going to Hell if you don't embrace our particular brand of religion."
They attempted to word their phone book ad to look like ours so girls would think they would be walking into a Woman's Clinic. The phone company put a stop to that.
Pregnancy Centers work on guilt, falsehood and half truths. None of them has a medical background but they insist on giving out medical advice. I can picture Speechless as a director for one of them. Tom

Apparently they are anything but "respected".

What part of I don't know anything about "anti-abortion clinics" do you not get? We're talking apples and oranges here, dude.


I see no love and compassion but instilling guilt using deception during a difficult period in a woman's life. Shame of them for their bait and switch techniques.

I agree, but I'm sure you won't let the truth get in the way of your smears anyway.



Need Karma nailed it! Way ta go Karma! We had several in Sarasota that specialized in guilt trips, "You're going to Hell if you abort." _You're going to Hell if you don't embrace our particular brand of religion." They attempted to word their phone book ad to look like ours so girls would think they would be walking into a Woman's Clinic. The phone company put a stop to that. Pregnancy Centers work on guilt, falsehood and half truths. None of them has a medical background but they insist on giving out medical advice. I can picture Speechless as a director for one of them. Tom

Dude, you're projecting. There's help for that, too.

It's good that these fake clinics were exposed. Thanks Steve!

It's good that these fake clinics were exposed. Thanks Steve!

Again, the idea of love in action is lost on you. But is good to know you think playing with the lives of women is a game.

I see your posts here, I'm sure "love" is your main concern... not! LOL.

I see your posts here, I'm sure "love" is your main concern... not! LOL.

And there go validating my last point, right on cue. Do you never learn?

What was validated? I showed that this organization uses subterfuge to get a specific message to women... and along the way it makes them feel bad about themselves. I'm not sure why you think playing with the lives of women is something to celebrate and promote.

Takes 18 years to bring a child to full maturity, and getting it there is but he beginning. What do you do for those 18 years the child is growing in the real world? That's when the love and support is needed, and where your argument falls apart, Speech, because you have not acted as a parent after forcing or fooling YOUR choice on a female.

When the child is born, you do the same thing a dead beat dad does, you leave and go about your business. Maybe not YOU personally, but your party does, or would if not for those that know better.

Bet those females that change heir minds up and go to a real clinic like Planned Parenthood for real doctors, and real help. If you are not going to be here for the whole process then don't force the choice.

Obligations don't end after birth!

Takes 18 years to bring a child to full maturity, and getting it there is but he beginning. What do you do for those 18 years the child is growing in the real world? That's when the love and support is needed, and where your argument falls apart, Speech, because you have not acted as a parent after forcing or fooling YOUR choice on a female.

When the child is born, you do the same thing a dead beat dad does, you leave and go about your business. Maybe not YOU personally, but your party does, or would if not for those that know better.

Bet those females that change heir minds up and go to a real clinic like Planned Parenthood for real doctors, and real help. If you are not going to be here for the whole process then don't force the choice.

Obligations don't end after birth!

Stop basing your argument on assumptions, Tal. You may think women are nothing more than helpless political tools in need of a government rescue but I don't. And I do find it ironic that you're OK with telling the very organizations you chastise for allegedly not doing enough, to cease providing such support for the sake of buying a hapless Georgetown grad's contraceptives.

That's the problem with liberals, you want it both ways. You whine and moan that we don't care while interfering with our ability to do just that. You want to replace what works with a cold, heartless government bureaucracy. People are not pawns, Tal.

How are you going to help me raise and support the child you won't allow me to abort?

QUOTE by speechlesstx;
Stop basing your argument on assumptions, Tal. You may think women are nothing more than helpless political tools in need of a government rescue but I don't.

There is no assumption in the facts that you force a female to have an unwanted child, and expect her to navigate life with NO help and support. Oh yeah she can always seek charity, but that doesn't raise kids or help her keep a job. It doesn't teach her to fish and provide for herself, or else there would be no poor.

Fact is poor people need MORE than just charity, and most of them are women and children. Not knocking what charities do, just there are not enough of them.

A BIG GAP needs to be filled, and who should fill it?


And I do find it ironic that you're OK with telling the very organizations you chastise for allegedly not doing enough, to cease providing such support for the sake of buying a hapless Georgetown grad's contraceptives.

It's the churches CHOICE to stop providing the services it can over the issue of free contraceptives. Or any other for that matter. I reject the notion that the church is above mans law. I reject the notion that man is subject to the church.


That's the problem with liberals, you want it both ways. You whine and moan that we don't care while interfering with our ability to do just that.

I reject the notion that the church can deny the benefits, and protections of the law to citizens. I know churches and charities care, but I also want them to obey he law.

Are you saying the church is a private business that should write its own rules? That's IRAN, not AMERICA!!


You want to replace what works with a cold, heartless government bureaucracy. People are not pawns, Tal.

Sounds good on paper, but in fact EQUAL PROTECTION under the law doesn't replace charity, nor stop your good works, you just say it does. Like I say, administer your charity and we will vote for the lawmakers.

Or is it the church way, or the highway?

There is no assumption in the facts that you force a female to have an unwanted child, and expect her to navigate life with NO help and support.

If you don't begin with the facts you can only argue on assumption. I don't FORCE anyone to have a baby, and the church is not infringing on anyone's rights. Try and stick to the facts.

Okay lets have some facts.

Do you vote for those that promise to make abortions illegal and defund places that women go for health care by professionals, because they have no money? Or insurance?

Okay lets have some facts.

Do you vote for those that promise to make abortions illegal and defund places that women go for health care by professionals, because they have no money? Or insurance?

I vote for people who support alternatives to abortion and Planned Parenthood. I've made no bones about it, I wouldn't give PP a nickel. It's one of the most vile organizations ever schemed up in my opinion. I don't consider them a legitimate "health care" provider for the mere fact they are driven by an agenda, not healing.

I vote for people who support alternatives to abortion
What's a "healing alternative to abortion"?

Ask my daughter, ask my friend Mary, ask any one of those women who regret their 'choice.' They want their baby back. They want to be free from the guilt, they want compassion, they want understanding, they want forgiveness, they want healing for their soul.

Hello again:


Pregnancy From Rape Is 'Something God Intended' (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/richard-mourdock-abortion_n_2007482.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=102412&utm_medium=email&utm_content=FeaturePhoto&utm_term=Daily%20Brief)So, when you lose the Senate AGAIN, you're probably going to say you weren't conservative ENOUGH. We're going to LOVE that.

Excon

"The only exception I have to have an abortion is in the case of the life of the mother," said Mourdock, the Tea Party-backed state treasurer. "I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize life is that gift from God. I think that even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen."

But, since you guys either don't believe in God or like Biden and Pelosi, reject your church's teaching, I can see how you wouldn't understand the struggle to recognize that life in the womb is a baby who had no choice in the matter.

Why do I have to practice MY religion the way YOU do?

Life IS NOT a gift from a god - it's natural reproduction that occurs whether a god is present. Basic biology. Do wombats consider their litter a gift from god?

Ask my daughter, ask my friend Mary, ask any one of those women who regret their 'choice.' They want their baby back. They want to be free from the guilt, they want compassion, they want understanding, they want forgiveness, they want healing for their soul.
That's not what I'm asking. I asked what do you mean by a "healing alternative to abortion," not healing after an abortion.

Why do I have to practice MY religion the way YOU do?

Why do you have to ask irrelevant questions? I don't care how you practice your religion, why do you care that he believes life is a gift from God?

Life IS NOT a gift from a god - it's natural reproduction that occurs whether a god is present. Basic biology. Do wombats consider their litter a gift from god?

That's your belief, why do I have to believe as you do?

That's not what I'm asking. I asked what do you mean by a " not healing after an abortion.

And I said nothing about a "healing alternative to abortion," I said an "alternative." My mention of healing was in regard to "health care." Look it up.

Hello again, Steve:


That's your belief, why do I have to believe as you do?Why don't you give me the same consideration? You DO support LAWS based on your beliefs, and you shove them down my throat..

Excon

Let's see now . A rape involves a rapist and a victim. When there is a pregnancy that results from a rape there is now 3 people involved . When there is an abortion because of the rape then you now have a rapist and 2 victims . But now one of the victims receives the death sentence ;a sentence that most pro-abortionists wouldn't give to the rapist.

Why don't you give me the same consideration? You DO support LAWS based on your beliefs, and you shove them down my throat..

Like Obamacare?

Hello again, tom:

If Romney wins, Steve doesn't believe Roe will be overturned. It certainly looks to me like you think it will. All pro lifers think the same as you. If someone on the Supreme Court has a chance to STOP the genocide, clearly they WOULD. Who, besides Steve, think they wouldn't?

excon

Dude, Romney's massive gains among women should tell you something... the fear-mongering ain't working.

There's a difference between what I wish and what will happen. I don't see Roe being overturned . If it was going to happen ,it would've in the Bush years.

Hello again, tom:

Bush didn't have a majority on the Supreme Court.. Romney will.. Boy, I thought you understood how that worked.

excon

Yes he did.. he had a 5-4 conservative court throughout including 2 of his appointees and Scalia and Roberts .

Hello again, tom:

That's nice on paper.. But, in the REAL world, Kennedy is a swing voter and you had no such majority. If Ginsburg retires, and Romney is elected, you righty's will have a 6-3 majority, and you'll wreak havoc with it..

excon

Under Obama Kennedy is a swing vote but under Romney he's a conservative?

That's your belief, why do I have to believe as you do?You don't believe in biological reproduction? I guess your wife could remain chaste and pray for a baby, let me know how that turns out for you.

I don't believe "natural reproduction" happened by chance, and I'll leave that other part for Jesus' mother.

When was the last documented occurrence of virgin birth?

I don't believe "natural reproduction" happened by chance, and I'll leave that other part for Jesus' mother. Your largest problem Speechless, is that your arguments are bases on belief and it's a fact that belief is not and can never be knowledge.
You also have the wrong conception of Planned Parenthood and Women's Clinics. You seem to think that all we do is abortions and that's entirely wrong. Pregnancy tests. Check and treatment for STD's and consulting are only a few, And where would you send a pregnant girl for help? A crisis pregnancy center? Lotta help there! Tom

Your largest problem Speechless, is that your arguments are bases on belief and it's a fact that belief is not and can never be knowledge.
You also have the wrong conception of Planned Parenthood and Women's Clinics. You seem to think that all we do is abortions and that's entirely wrong. Pregnancy tests. Check and treatment for STD's and consulting are only a few, And where would you send a pregnant girl for help? A crisis pregnancy center? Lotta help there! Tom
__________________

Try getting out of your bubble once in a while.

How Romney has empowered women (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/23/opinion/edmonds-romney-women/index.html)


Editor's note: Jane Edmonds served as a member of Gov. Mitt Romney's cabinet and as head of the Department of Workforce Development in Massachusetts. She also was an appointee of Gov. Michael S. Dukakis and served as chair of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD), the civil rights law enforcement agency for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. She is a surrogate for Mitt Romney's presidential campaign.

(CNN) -- "Baby, law isn't a good profession for girls," my father told me.

"Stay with music, dear, that is what you and your people do so well," my high school dean said.

I was 16, and asking them the most important question of my life: Will you tell me how to become a lawyer?

My dad was a product of the segregated South. Orphaned at the age of 12, he pulled himself up by his bootstraps. After leaving Georgia for Washington, where he lived with a relative, he attended an integrated school, Dunbar High. Eventually, he earned his way into Syracuse University, where he was one of the first black men to graduate. In spite of his achievements, he and our family faced discrimination. Nevertheless, he kept his sense of humor, and worked hard to be a good provider.

My father's message was loving and protective. He didn't want to see me hurt.

My dean's message was scornful and discriminatory. She took a sledgehammer to my dreams, and when I left her office that day, I was crushed and fighting tears. I couldn't understand her answer.

I wanted to go to a good college, attend a respected law school and advocate for people needing help and craving justice. I refused to abandon these high hopes.

And I didn't. I followed my dreams and went to law school. More than 40 years later, I became one of the 10 women named to top policy-making posts in the early months of Gov. Mitt Romney's administration in Massachusetts. There, I headed up the Department of Workforce Development. During Gov. Romney's tenure, our state led the nation in terms of the ratio of women holding top spots in the administration, and to this day, that's something about which I am incredibly proud to have been a part of.

And so, as I've heard criticism about Gov. Romney's admirable record of recruiting women to serve in his administration, I feel compelled to speak out about the Mitt Romney I know.

I remember meeting him for the first time. I was struck by his authenticity, and over the years that I worked with him, I saw the accuracy of my first impression. Gov. Romney's overriding commitment was not to self-promotion -- as is so often the case for politicians -- but for the people he served, and the people he served with. He believes in empowering women. I would know, because I was one of those women he recruited and respected.

Today, there are more than 5 million women around this country -- mothers, daughters, breadwinners -- who are unemployed. They are not only robbed of their dignity and their self-respect; they are also robbed of the results of decades of hard work. More women are in poverty -- 25.7 million -- than at any time in our nation's history.

And for too many young people, the doors of opportunity remain closed shut by these tough economic circumstances. Half of recent college graduates are either jobless or underemployed. The cost of college has continued to rise in the last four years and student loan debt stands at record levels.

When Mitt Romney was governor, he worked with a legislature that was 87% Democratic to get things done. And to me, that really meant something: I consider myself a liberal Democrat. For him, it wasn't about who you were, it was about the quality of your ideas. That's how he improved the economy and balanced the budget, but that's not all he accomplished. Gov. Romney also initiated the John and Abigail Adams Scholarship to cover the cost of college at public institutions of higher education in the state for deserving high school students based on academic merit.

During his time as governor, Massachusetts maintained its schools' ranking as first in the nation.

Opportunity. Empowerment. That's what Mitt Romney has stood for while in politics and in business, and that's what matters to women. In government, he created opportunities for young people to attend college. In business, he took a chance on people to allow their dreams to flourish into realities.

I've been able to rise in life because of people who see the world this way. Looking back, I'm grateful to those who believe that education is a civil right and that the dreams of all should be encouraged and cultivated. And that's precisely why I'm supporting Mitt Romney.

Contrast that to the current president who doesn't like people and pays women less than men.


"It's stunning that he's in politics, because he really doesn't like people. My analogy is that it's like becoming Bill Gates without liking computers.”

I'll take a genuine guy that believes in people and actually does empower women over a divisive poser like Obama any day.

That was the worse piece of BS I have seen LOL

Also Jane Edmonds served as a member of Gov. Mitt Romney's cabinet.

I like how you take one person's opinion and if you agree with it you apply it to a whole group of people or try to pass it off as another person's policy.

The hate is so strong in you it takes over everything you write.

I know if I work for Romney, he will make sure I have time to be at home to make dinner for my family. And do the laundry. And clean house. And bathe the kids and put them to bed. After all, he respects us "little women."

That was the worse piece of BS I have seen LOL

Also Jane Edmonds served as a member of Gov. Mitt Romney's cabinet.

Um, that's part of the point. Duh.


I like how you take one person's opinion and if you agree with it you apply it to a whole group of people or try to pass it off as another person's policy.

I like how you immediately discredit a black, female "liberal Democrat" that was also appointed to a position by a liberal Democrat named Michael Dukakis and demean her experience working for a white Republican. I mean surely no black, female liberal Democrat can be genuine if she supports a Republican, right? How pathetic. Do your legs get tired from all that knee-jerking?


The hate is so strong in you it takes over everything you write.

Coming from you I'll take that as a compliment.



I know if I work for Romney, he will make sure I have time to be at home to make dinner for my family. And do the laundry. And clean house. And bathe the kids and put them to bed. After all, he respects us "little women."

Well you know, some women like being moms and wives. Some women like to go home and cook dinner. Some women like to go home and spend time with their family. Some women find it endearing that Romney was flexible so women in his employ could balance work and life at home with less pressure.

And some women just call such women are whiners that should "man up."


Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says in a new interview that she can’t stand “whining” by women who are unhappy with the work and family choices they’ve made in life and complain that they have no options.

Clinton, in the interview with Marie Claire, was discussing Anne-Marie Slaughter, a former director of policy planning at the State Department who left in 2011. This summer, Slaughter wrote a much-discussed cover story in the Atlantic — “Why Women Still Can’t Have It all” — about leaving her job because of the difficulty of balancing her work at State with the needs of her two teenage boys.

“I can’t stand whining,” Clinton told Marie Claire. “I can’t stand the kind of paralysis that some people fall into because they’re not happy with the choices they’ve made. You live in a time when there are endless choices. … Money certainly helps, and having that kind of financial privilege goes a long way, but you don’t even have to have money for it. But you have to work on yourself. … Do something!”

Read more: Hillary Clinton trashes whiners - Kevin Robillard - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1012/82586.html#ixzz2AFc01yJA)

Now I understand even more why that former Obama official called his admin a "hostile workplace" for women.

American politics are pathetic aren't they? Not one good person in the whole bunch.

American politics are pathetic aren't they? Not one good person in the whole bunch.

Well that answers my question about Edmonds.

I know this thread has largely been about abortion but perhaps its time to broaden it
Despite the Arab revolt, women remain shackled to past (http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/despite-the-arab-revolt-women-remain-shackled-to-past-20121024-285mz.html)
Recently a journalist was attacked in Cairo, the idea is that this happened because she is a woman and this may well be so, but there are wider issues here and you cannot look beyond the Muslim world when looking for a war on women.

We have no evidence that a male journalist would not be attacked by the mob just by being there but the fact that there was a female journalist with camera crew has some serious cultural issues surrounding it. Here is a female who in the eyes of the mob was in the company of men not of her own family and in an area where such attacks occur often.

So it comes down to the question, why do we persist with these outmoded cultural societies who on the one hand sign on to UN conventions but do nothing. These mobs are one reason a prosperous society is now in serious economic trouble. Should we defend the freedom of such people to trash a society, cover up the momuments of centuries and stand in judgement of our society and its cultural norms of allowing women to go where they will

Clete, asked that question many times. The typical response is we just need to respect their culture and mind our own business. In fact, I believe it was you who said (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/mideast-eruption-take-2-a-703496-4.html#post3279460) something to that effect.

The post you referred from Clete has him saying that the US should stay out of other people's business.

There are religious wackos everywhere sadly. Do you want the French meddling with the US religious wackos?

Clete, asked that question many times. The typical response is we just need to respect their culture and mind our own business. In fact, I believe it was you who said (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/mideast-eruption-take-2-a-703496-4.html#post3279460) something to that effect.

Indeed speech, but since it is obviously not your intention to do so, Romney made that fairly clear. I can respect their culture as long as they respect mine, however the record of america particularly in recent times has been to impose its culture on various places particularly in the. Middle east. Now the state that this incident took place in was, until recently, a more liberally minded place, however your administration fawns over an administration that would permitt this sort of behaviour, something about freedom from a dictator america supported. You will forgive my confusion I just don't know what side you are on

Indeed speech, but since it is obviously not your intention to do so, Romney made that fairly clear. I can respect their culture as long as they respect mine, however the record of america particularly in recent times has been to impose its culture on various places particularly in the. middle east. now the state that this incident took place in was, until recently, a more liberally minded place, however your administration fawns over an administration that would permitt this sort of behaviour, something about freedom from a dictator america supported. you will forgive my confusion I just don't know what side you are on

Easy, I'm on the side of right which doesn't cower to Islam when it comes to women's rights.

2012 Massachusetts President: Romney vs. Obama (http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2012-massachusetts-president-romney-vs-obama)

Your assertion would be more credible if a mother of 4 working minimum wage was tauting mittens, not some employee, and the race, gender doesn't matter. Also if there were a bunch of 'em, not just one.

Mittens may not win in the state he has done soooooo much for.

The war on women has really come alive with the suggestion that the candidate really has nothing to do with their choice, basically they think with their vagina
CNN uproar over story linking women's voting to menstrual cycle (http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life/online-outrage-prompts-cnn-to-pull-story-linking-female-voting-to-ovulation-20121025-287rq.html)

I know if I work for Romney, he will make sure I have time to be at home to make dinner for my family. And do the laundry. And clean house. And bathe the kids and put them to bed. After all, he respects us "little women."

Well you know what Evita would say... suck it up .

http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/974317/hillary-clinton-tells-women-quit-whining-and-work-hard

Edit... didn't see that Speechless already addressed this . Her comments were in the context of one of her State Dept professionals quiting and writing a big essay in the Atlantic about how hard it is.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/

I'm a father and a have a job and I don't whine about it. Hilary is right.

American politics are pathetic aren't they? Not one good person in the whole bunch.

Not true ;we just claim that they all suck . It is in our history . We like our politics this way.
The nicest thing said about Lincoln was that he was a country bumpkin .Ike was called a bumbling fool who is lazy and incapable of understanding the complexity of the world. Yes the same Ike that led the most complex military coalition the world has ever seen. Andrew Jackson's wife was accused of being a prostitute, The allegation was that Grover Cleveland had illegitimate children.

Jefferson and Adams used surrogates in the press (pamphleteers... the bloggers of their day) to slander each other while pretending to be above the fray . Jefferson side said Adams was a "hideous hermaphroditical character, which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman." Adams side countered that Jefferson was "a mean-spirited, low-lived fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw sired by a Virginia mulatto father."
The 2 men were best of friends and maintained a cordial relationship until they both died on July 4,1826 ;the 50th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence ;a document they both signed.

The founders would approve of this contest (except perhaps Washington) . They paid lip service to the idea that politicians should be citizen statesmen and claimed to detest party politics. But it took less than a decade for them to split into factions and become life time professional politicians themselves.

What they did have in common however was an inherent distrust of central power of the government. If there is any change from our founding ,that is the big difference.

edit ... didn't see that Speechless already addressed this . Her comments were in the context of one of her State Dept professionals quiting and writing a big essay in the Atlantic about how hard it is.

Why Women Still Can?t Have It All - Anne-Marie Slaughter - The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/07/why-women-still-cant-have-it-all/309020/)


No he didn't address in the correct fashion.The article by Professor Slaughter is not a essay on hostile work places.

Clinton didn't read the essay either. She is not complaining about suffering from some sort of paralysis about the choices she has made.

Tut

No he didn't address in the correct fashion.The article by Professor Slaughter is not a essay on hostile work places.

Clinton didn't read the essay either. She is not complaining about suffering from some sort of paralysis about the choices she has made.

I never suggested Slaughter's essay was on hostile work places. The only link to her essay was in regard to Romney being "flexible so women in his employ could balance work and life at home" as opposed to Hillary calling them whiners.

If the boss thinks you're a whiner for wanting to take care of your job and your family THAT hints at a hostile work place which is what one former administration staffer called it. I made all the correct links.

I'm a father and a have a job and I don't whine about it. Hilary is right.

Are you a woman, too? Men and women are different you know.

Your assertion would be more credible if a mother of 4 working minimum wage was tauting mittens, not some employee, and the race, gender doesn't matter. Also if there were a bunch of 'em, not just one

There is only one candidate talking about poverty, unemployment and helping Americans make ends meet... and it isn't Obama.

York: Romney, not Obama, shows concern for nation's poor (http://washingtonexaminer.com/york-romney-not-obama-shows-concern-for-nations-poor/article/2511417#.UIk9o2f1bf0)

Romney talks about it but offers no platform point at all i.e. he has no plans to address the issue: Issues | Mitt Romney for President (http://www.mittromney.com/issues)
Nowhere there does he mention poverty.

That's the problem, Romney talks and Obama does. How many Chinese workers have American jobs because of Mitt? Keep counting because he is still doing it!!

Actions speak louder than words, and FACTS trump campaign speeches!!

You guys are in denial. Romney is actually talking about issue that matter while that petulant poser is talking Big Bird, binders and bayonets.

ogdjQjxH8LM

Petulant poser!!

So instead of showing us where Romney has plans to deal with poverty you decide to go into attack mode by showing a video of why Obama is a poser because he goes into attack mode? LOL! You guys are worth the price od admission to this forum!

Thats the problem, Romney talks and Obama does. How many Chinese workers have American jobs because of Mitt? Keep counting because he is still doing it!!!!

Actions speak louder than words, and FACTS trump campaign speeches!!!!

Don't know how Romney is responsible for job losses to China while he hasn't been in management in Bain is 2001 .
Anyway ,582,000 manufacturing jobs have been lost to China and India since Obama has been in office . Clearly Romney's fault.

If you weren't so busy passing abortion bills and tax cuts to the job creators that haven't created jobs, we would have closed those loopholes by now, and brought those jobs back already.

Of course you blame the democrats for those companies closing American plants for Chinese and Indian sweat shops.

And you think having a buyout specialist for president will change all that? Mitts solution is to bring sweat shops here.

So instead of showing us where Romney has plans to deal with poverty you decide to go into attack mode by showing a video of why Obama is a poser because he goes into attack mode? LOL! You guys are worth the price od admission to this forum!

No, watching you dodge and flail and jerk is worth the price of admission.

I post a link to Romney's site to talk about the issues and you think that's "dodge and flail and jerk". Oh well.

Hello again,

Let me ask my right wing friends a couple questions... Romney said he'd allow abortion in the case of rape. That's nice of him, but WHO is going to determine if the woman was actually raped? Are they going to take her word for it? Certainly not Todd Aiken.. According to HIM, being knocked up is PROOF she WASN'T raped.. The cops, maybe? Are they going to take the rapists word? Does the lady have to wait till a trial happens? What about an appeal?

About taking her word for it, you can't do THAT. Certainly, if a lady wants an abortion, and that's the only way to get one, she'll claim rape. That defeats the purpose, and you can't let 'em get away with THAT, now can you?

Inquiring minds want to know. I just want to know how you small government conservatives are going to manage this.

excon

You really think that many women are going to subject themselves to the legal and physical scrutiny that comes with a rape accusation just to get an abortion? No, they'll just go to Planned Parenthood, they don't much care about rules.

Hello again, Steve:

You misunderstand. If Romney and his ilk win, they WILL make abortion illegal EXCEPT for rape.. I don't know if you've been paying attention, but there's been a LOT of talk about it... I mean a LOT...

So, I'm just asking what happens IF Romney wins?? Oh, I know you don't think they'll make abortion illegal, and I don't know what planet you're living on.. But, humor me... Let's PRETEND.

But, you won't, will you. That's because you and Romney make PROCLAMATIONS without any plan or idea how to actually carry them out on the ground... That's why he won't tell us the details of his tax plan, and that's why you won't tell us the details of his/your abortion plan...

excon

No I still don't think abortion will ever be overturned. You guys just keep on trifling about Big Bird, binders, bayonets and a mythical war on women and we'll move forward with the economy and fighting the war on poverty and such.

Paul Ryan in Ohio: ‘In this war on poverty, poverty’s winning’ (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/263885-paul-ryan-in-this-war-on-poverty-povertys-winning)

P.S. Women LOVE me.

I just want to know how you small government conservatives are going to manage this.



This small govt guy would've left it for the states to decide. This small government guy would've let the people make laws ;not the courts .Then I'd have had my fight with my state .

If the states have a squabble then they may need a court to settle it. As we see that's what's happened in several states already. That's their job isn't it? That's what civil societies do, have a civil way of settling disputes.

State or National.

Came across another interesting point of view about the Mourdock non-issue via Timothy P. Carney (http://washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-2012-not-all-men-and-women-are-created-equal/article/2511726?utm_source=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinio n%20Digest%20-%2010/26/2012&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Washington%20Examiner:%20Opinion%20Di gest#.UIrM4mf1bf1).


Back in August, for a column, I spent a day talking to women who had conceived or been conceived by rape. It was the most most emotionally exhausting day of my career. One woman I spoke to is now a mom. Her name is Jenni Maas. Jenni said her mother tells her “it was a horrible thing that happened, but this was a little light in her life.”

If you believe being pro-life like Donnelly is morally acceptable, but you find Mourdock’s comments to betray an unacceptable view, then what you find offensive or extreme is the notion that Jenni is as much a person as you are.

This is an interesting moral proposition on which the Democrats have chosen to run.

Go ahead, tear into me.

Go ahead, tear into me.
No tearing from me. I'm just not sure that every time I looked at my child, I would want to remember the rape and possibly see his face in the child's face.

Hello again, Steve:


Go ahead, tear into me.Couple things... I would NEVER tear into you for your personal beliefs... I respect you. But, try to FORCE them on me, and I'll NEVER stop hassling you.

Secondarily, nobody is saying that fertilized eggs don't turn into good people... We ARE saying that a mother should NOT be FORCED by the state to have her rapist's baby.

You say the nanny state shouldn't force people to STOP eating at McDonald's, but you're FINE with the state doing that... Makes NO sense to me.

Excon

Actually, all I said was there was nothing evil about Mourdock's comment. Sometimes those babies become a Jenni.

I think the one who has to live with her decision should be the one to make the decision.