Hello:

We've had post after post about this alleged war on women. The right wing says, what war? There's nothing going on here. Look over there. Then they accuse the Democrats of pitting women against men. They just want to talk about jobs...

But, even after those discussion, the war on women persists... The Republicans want to exclude certain classes of women (http://articles.cnn.com/2012-05-18/politics/politics_violence-against-women-act_1_senate-democrats-republican-leaders-bipartisan-support?_s=PM:POLITICS)from the Violence Against Women Act. That seems pretty mean against women, and I don't know WHAT that has to do with jobs anyway.. The right wingers are AGAINST Paycheck Fairness Act. (http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-the-senate-pass-the-paycheck-fairness-act) With a reported 77 cents to the dollar pay gap between women and men, respectively, the act will FIX it. Republicans are just fine with the discrepancy.

These are only two examples of the ongoing war. There are countless more. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/20/opinion/sunday/the-attack-on-women-is-real.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120520) Does the right wing think they can continue to deny this multi-front attack?

excon

It is the Violence Against Women "reauthorization (Violence Against Women Act)" Act, and Dems want to reauthorize it include provisions for illegal aliens to claim temporary visas and expand coverage to same sex couples. It's not a war on women, it's Democrats trying to paint Republicans in a corner. It's all politics (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/us/politics/violence-against-women-act-divides-senate.html?_r=1).


“I favor the Violence Against Women Act and have supported it at various points over the years, but there are matters put on that bill that almost seem to invite opposition,” said Senator Jeff Sessions, Republican of Alabama, who opposed the latest version last month in the Judiciary Committee. “You think that’s possible? You think they might have put things in there we couldn’t support that maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?”

I'll care about your pathetic war on women meme when you liberals start talking about issues that really matter instead of all this pandering bullsh*t. By the way, did you notice the all woman panel on your Paycheck Fairness Act link were opposed to it 4-3? Probably not.

So how exactly are these two bills passage going to bring us out of this stagnant economy?

So how exactly are these two bills passage going to bring us out of this stagnant economy?Hello Steve:

What? We can't protect women AND create a few jobs?? That may be something righty's can't do, but Obama CAN walk and chew gum at the same time...

The fact that there are right wingers who'll tow the party line doesn't impress me. Besides, I'm on the RIGHT side of this argument.. I'm for SPREADING the blessings of freedom, while you're for LIMITING them. Therefore, it wouldn't matter HOW many right wing women you line up against me.

excon

Buddy, making more and more Americans dependent on government is not freedom, it's quite the opposite. Treating women and minorities as if they can't get by without the government's help is not empowering, it's quite the opposite. And don't whine to me about "toeing the party line," it doesn't get any more hyper-partisan than your side of the aisle.

Treating women and minorities as if they can't get by without the government's help is not empowering, it's quite the opposite.Hello again, Steve:

So, in the ABSENCE of rules against it, companies, on their own motion, WOULD pay women the same as men... In the ABSENCE of laws against it, black people wouldn't have to ride in the back of the bus... In the ABSENCE of laws against it, you think women would have choices over their own bodies...

Dude! Send me some of what YOU'RE smokin..

excon

Honestly, I love to read questions like this. I like to see other's opinions, and I like to think about them myself... I won't post a deeply political answer on here, because I am supposed to be doing homework right now, and that would take a logn time. However, there is one thing I saw that I want to discuss.
Quote: 'Reublicans are just fine with discrepency.' What? Really? I'm a republican conservative. No, I don't believe everybody in my party is clean or correct, and no, I don't believe that everybody who calls themselves a democrat is a fool, like so many of my colleagues believe.
However, you have made a fool out of yourself by claiming that all republicans are fine with discrepency. In my seventeen years of life, the only thing I have learned from politicians is that they can make you angry. However, when as certain person's follower goes and vents out their frustration on an entire group, like you did above, they become just as foolish as the people they oppose so vehemently.
So, in closing, no, I don't believe your point is valid. Republicans are not fine with discrepency. I am proof of this.

Honestly, I love to read questions like this. I like to see other's opinions, and I like to think about them myself...I won't post a deeply political answer on here,

So, in closing, no, I don't believe your point is valid. Republicans are not fine with discrepency. I am proof of this.Hello b:

Hold on, Youngster... First off you say you're not going to post anything deeply political, and then you tear into me for posting something deeply political...

You're right, though. I should have been more specific. I didn't mean ALL Republicans. I meant the Republicans in congress who have the POWER to make law. THEY'RE the ones who think the discrepancy is fine, and what THEY think counts. That's who I was talking about.

But, if you hang around here, you may just find some Republicans who ARE fine with it.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

So, in the ABSENCE of rules against it, companies, on their own motion, WOULD pay women the same as men... In the ABSENCE of laws against it, black people wouldn't have to ride in the back of the bus... In the ABSENCE of laws against it, you think women would have choices over their own bodies...


Straw man. There are already rules against abusing women and pay discrimination, Roe v. Wade is settled and you can talk to Michelle Obama about patient dumping instead of dredging up that trite back of the bus crap.

Straw man. There are already rules against abusing women and pay discriminationHello again, Steve:

Let me see. The Democrats passed a HUGE health care law when it wasn't necessary at all.. In fact, everybody get's all the care they need. Republicans are just trying to prevent wasteful duplication..

In that same vein, we don't need laws that protect women, either. Cause there already ARE those laws.. The Republicans are only trying to prevent wasteful duplication...

Since I know the first part ain't true, why should I believe the second part?

excon

Let me see, the Democrats promised we could keep our insurance if we liked it, the cost has doubled (http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/why-doubling-obamacares-cost-matters/438761) from what was promised and they destroyed the first amendment in the process and still can't figure out why anyone would balk at raising the debt ceiling again without cutting spending while questioning Republican's patriotism (http://baseballcrank.com/archives2/2012/05/politics_democr_4.php) while refusing to submit a budget for 3 years, and manufactured a mythical "war on women".

Why the heck should I trust them, they're just children pretending to be grownups for the sake of establishing their oligarchy so they can nanny all those people they lie about protecting.

Hello b:

Hold on, Youngster... First off you say you're not gonna post anything deeply political, and then you tear into me for posting something deeply political...

You're right, though. I should have been more specific. I didn't mean ALL Republicans. I meant the Republicans in congress who have the POWER to make law. THEY'RE the ones who think the discrepancy is fine, and what THEY think counts. That's who I was talking about.

But, if you hang around here, you may just find some Republicans who ARE fine with it.

excon



Honestly, I'm relatively confident there are republicans who believe they are doing the right things with these kinds of bills, and in doing so, promote discrepancy. I have no doubt of this, and I am sure that these people are what raise your concerns. I only posted on the basis of your statement that we all uphold discrepency, and being that you have formally redacted and clarified that statement, we have no quarell. However, I would find it interesting if you could post something showing who exactly it is that is promoting discrepency, and with what bills they support it through, if that would be something you could do. I would like to read up on that.

if you could post something showing who exactly it is that is promoting discrepency, and with what bills they support it through, if that would be something you could do. Hello again, b:

In my original post, there are some blue words. Those are links to articles.

excon

Republican women are fighting back...

sL8Uv_xiShc


That’s what makes the Democrats’ message to American women so strange and unsettling. For the past few months, the Democrats have been accusing Republicans of waging a “war on women” as if some honest disagreements between the parties — over matters like how an “Obamacare” mandate should affect religious institutions or the proper scope of federal law on tribal land — constitute a deliberate GOP campaign to take away women’s rights.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and Republican women have been at the forefront exposing these myths. Let’s face it: Republican women — like us — would never be part of a party that didn’t believe in women’s rights, equal pay for equal work and strong laws against sexual violence. The Republican Party believes in all of those things.

We also believe in something else: We believe that women want to be empowered. We believe that women want independence. We want opportunities. We want an equal chance to succeed — no special favors and no glass ceilings. We want our daughters to have those same opportunities, that same chance to live the American dream. We want our sons to have it, too.

What policies promote freedom, opportunity and self-ownership? Certainly not the Democrats’ Big Government policies. The Democrats showed their hand recently with their “Life of Julia” infographic. The Obama campaign used this to illustrate how a typical woman is dependent on government programs from birth to death — and how the GOP is supposedly undermining those programs.

Leaving aside that everything the “Julia” campaign said about Republicans is either mostly wrong or totally wrong, “Julia’s” life is not typical of American women. Nor is it something that we aspire to. We don’t see our lives as a product of government handouts. In fact, we resent the idea that we owe our success to bureaucrats, and not our own initiative.

Republican women are fighting back...Hello Steve:

Wow. I never would have thunk Republican women would disagree with me... You could knock me over with a feather...

excon

Hello again, Steve:

Coat hanger abortions are fine, (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/15/484326/mississippi-lawmaker-abortions-moral-values/) says Mississippi lawmaker, because ‘Hey, you have to have moral values’.

excon


Of course you'd never consider what they said or how illogical it for a woman to represent a party that hates women.Hello again, Steve:

I DO think it's illogical. The whole thing IS illogical.. But, should I not believe my lying eyes?? Here's the deal.. I DO consider what these women SAID.. I ALSO consider how they VOTED, and how they VOTED is at odds with what they SAY.

If given a choice to believe what they SAY or what they DO, I'm going to pick DO. Every single woman in the video who PROCLAIMED she was for women's rights, and equal pay for equal work, voted AGAINST the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

There just ain't nothing more to say.

excon

Hello Steve:

Wow. I never woulda thunk Republican women would disagree with me... You could knock me over with a feather...

excon
Hello, excon:

There are only 24 of them who do.

WG

Hello WG:

The Republicans seem to think that SAYING they're for women's rights, and BEING for women's rights are the same thing...

In fact, the very first congresswoman in Steve's video, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, voted AGAINST (http://www.knoxviews.com/node/10156) the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

I didn't look, but I'll bet the rest of 'em did too.

Bwa, ha ha ha ha.

excon

Yeah that war on women and the war on religious freedom strategery is really working out for the Pres. Now he has those liberal bastions of academia ,Notre Dame U ,and The Catholic University of America joining in a lawsuit against the contraception mandate.
His diversion over reaches to distract from the poor economy is FAIL .

It is sad you want to argue about such inconsequential issues when there are real issues to argue about

Women have got it all man
Gina Rinehart named world's richest woman, ahead of Wal-Mart widow Christy Walton | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/business/companies/brw-names-gina-rinehart-worlds-richest-woman-ahead-of-wal-mart-widow-christy-walton/story-fnda1bsz-1226364649333)

And best of all not a Wall Street adviser in sight

Hello again, Steve:

Coat hanger abortions are fine, (http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/15/484326/mississippi-lawmaker-abortions-moral-values/) says Mississippi lawmaker, because ‘Hey, you have to have moral values’.

excon

Sorry, but that's not what he said at all.

Hello Steve:

Wow. I never woulda thunk Republican women would disagree with me... You could knock me over with a feather...

excon

Of course you'd never consider what they said or how illogical it for a woman to represent a party that hates women. You'd rather just run with this childish campaign of clichés that Obama is engaged in.

Again as I said, there are already laws on the books covering all of the issues you raised. Smart women SHOULD vote as they did. As strong, independent conservative women know, the life of Julia being tethered to the federal government from cradle to grave is not empowering. I'm surprised you think so little of women that you think they have to have Obama's help to survive.

Again as I said, there are already laws on the books covering all of the issues you raised.Hello again, Steve:

Nahhh... Talk, talk, talk... Just like the Republican women.. It doesn't change the TRUTH...

The Lilly Ledbetter law was a direct answer to the Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. A U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that the statute of limitations for presenting an equal-pay lawsuit begins on the date that the employer makes the initial discriminatory wage decision, not at the date of the most recent paycheck, as a lower court had ruled.

You DO understand that the lower court ruling CHEATED women out of equal pay for equal work. That's just so... And, ALL of your Republican women voted against it.

excon

You do understand that decision has nothing to do with the Equal Pay Act. She sued under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. She had 3 years to sue under the Equal Pay Act and 4 years under 42 U.S.C. 1981 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1981). Why did it need to be expanded to the Civil Rights Act also?

Like I said there were already laws on the books. Now there are three.

P.S. Let's see who comes out to defend S.E. Cupp after Hustler published an explicit, humiliating, degrading, Photoshopped image (http://www.mediaite.com/online/explicit-image-of-s-e-cupp-its-a-fake-in-hustler-magazine-sparks-outrage/) and criticized her conservative leanings.

There is no war on women, women think they are a special species that should have privileges, they are not

there is no war on women, women think they are a special species that should have privileges, they are not

Just ask the White House and Senate Democrats.

Senate Dems Betray Lilly (http://freebeacon.com/senate-dems-betray-lilly/)
Senate Democrats pay female staffers less than male staffers

I guess conservatives are busy reading Hustler. Good family values to be found there. LOL!

I guess conservatives are busy reading Hustler. Good family values to be found there. LOL!

Um, the source was Mediate (http://www.mediaite.com/online/explicit-image-of-s-e-cupp-its-a-fake-in-hustler-magazine-sparks-outrage/), not Hustler. But I'm not surprised you would ignorantly mock conservatives instead of denouncing Hustler for their smear of a conservative woman. Priorities, right?

Someone read Hustler to find something that was offensive to conservatives.
Personally Hustler can print any damn thing it wants, it can say that Obama is gay or that liberals eat babies. The people that get their opinions from there are irrelevant to me.
Once again the easily offended get offended easily.

Someone read Hustler to find something that was offensive to conservatives

What part of Mediate read Hustler so we don't have to (http://www.mediaite.com/online/explicit-image-of-s-e-cupp-its-a-fake-in-hustler-magazine-sparks-outrage/) don't you understand?


Once again the easily offended get offended easily.

So you publish a doctored photo of Nancy Pelosi with a penis in her mouth and let's see if no one gets offended.

So you publish a doctored photo of Nancy Pelosi with a penis in her mouth and let's see if no one gets offended.Do it in your regular nasty porn mag and see what happens.
If they are offended by that and not by the pink spreads then there's something wrong, no?

You can stay on the wrong side of this all you want, but for once even Planned Parenthood gets it right.


Planned Parenthood, Sandra Fluke condemn Hustler for S.E. Cupp image (http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/23/planned-parenthood-sandra-fluke-condemn-hustler-for-s-e-cupp-image/#ixzz1vobV49JF)
3:04 PM 05/23/2012
ADVERTISEMENT

The Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Sandra Fluke have condemned Hustler Magazine's treatment of conservative commentator S.E. Cupp.

The most recent issue of Hustler reportedly features a fake image of Cupp with a phallus in her mouth, citing her opposition to abortion and Planned Parenthood as reasons for the image.

“S.E. Cupp is a lovely young lady who read too much Ayn Rand in high school and ended up joining the dark side,” the caption reads. “Cupp, an author and media commentator who often shows up on Fox News programs, is undeniably cute. But her hotness is diminished when she espouses dumb ideas like defunding Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the method pictured here is Ms. Cupp's suggestion for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.”

Wednesday afternoon both Planned Parenthood Action Fund (the self-described political arm of Planned Parenthood) and contraception activist Sandra Fluke tweeted in support of Cupp.

“Sexist attacks made against women like @SandraFluke and recently @secupp are disgraceful and cannot be tolerated Explicit Image Of S.E. Cupp (It's A Fake) In Hustler Magazine Sparks Outrage | Mediaite (http://bit.ly/KCz6VE,”) PPAF tweeted.

“.@HustlerMag depiction of @secupp so offensive. Sexualization of female public figs attempts 2 limit them 2 being sexual figures & not more,” Fluke added.

Cupp responded to the image on Glenn Beck's radio program Wednesday.

“It's uncomfortable. I'm not in this business to talk about myself, I'm not in this business to talk about my character,” she said in part. “I'd much rather be talking about Obama's economic record or his foreign policy than myself and having to defend myself against [this photo].”

Hustler did not respond to The Daily Caller's request for comment.

Go ahead, you tolerate this disgraceful attack on a fine, intelligent, beautiful woman. I won't.

Update: Video added. You tell me what she did to deserve such degradation and then you can help her explain it to her children some day.

pY_0mIN4SKc

Almost forgot this one (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76703.html#ixzz1vp3AwoEK), "Donna Dewitt, the president of the South Carolina AFL-CIO, takes a baseball bat to a piñata featuring" Gov. Nikki Haley's face.

Yep, those darn Republicans sure are waging a war on women.

Yep, those darn Republicans sure are waging a war on women.Yep, that is indeed what the thread is about.

Yep, that is indeed what the thread is about.

Apparently you can't perceive reality or sarcasm.

Live Action visited some more abortion clinics and not only captured them encouraging gender-selective abortions, but how to defraud Medicaid in the process.

U2H3ZDnBtuw


“In this video, what is astounding is that Rebecca, the Planned Parenthood counselor, starts arranging with the actor about how to get a late-term abortion,” Rose said. “To wait until her pregnancy is so developed that — and using Medicaid for this, using the state to pay for the ultrasound to determine the gender, and then to do a late term abortion if it was a little girl (http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/29/pro-life-groups-hidden-camera-footage-shows-complicity-in-sex-selective-abortions/#ixzz1wGyCkXFQ).”

First accepting funds for race-based abortions, now PP encouraging late term abortions of girls while defrauding Medicaid. There's your war on women.

Donna Dewitt, the president of the South Carolina AFL-CIO, takes a baseball bat to a piñata featuring Gov. Nikki Haley's face.Hello again, Steve:

We're not in the same ballpark when you equate a political stunt to passing LAWS that restrict women's rights... YOUR balance is about as balanced as FOX News is balanced.. Which is to say, not really balanced at all.

Is your video done by the same guy who dressed up as a pimp?? The one who's been discredited??

excon

So you're saying that gender bias against girls - encouraged by the left's favorite group, PP - isn't a problem in the U.S. and that targeting females for abortion isn't a war on women? Dude, if killing off the gender isn't a war on women I can't imagine what else could possible qualify. Kind of stupid to worry about women's rights if you're systematically eliminating them.

Looks like that video will go the way of the other one they tried to "promote":
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/statement-stuart-schear-vice-president-communications-planned-parenthood-federation-america-liv-36136.htm


"In addition, it is clear from the edited tape that there are two or more video sources, as well as an additional audio source, increasing the opportunity for manipulation and selective editing.

"The truth is that Live Action has a history of doctoring video, making false claims and has no credibility. This is a tactic similar to that of James O’Keefe, the discredited right-wing activist long associated with Live Action.
Then they show the history of these people doctoring videos.

Hello again, Steve:

I think what we've established here and in the other thread, is that even though you proclaim that you don't watch FOX News, you buy what they're selling, hook, line and sinker.

excon

Looks like that video will go the way of the other one they tried to "promote":
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/statement-stuart-schear-vice-president-communications-planned-parenthood-federation-america-liv-36136.htm


Then they show the history of these people doctoring videos.

Here you go, the unedited version.

x6nnZlTwo3w

Apparently this young lady coerced PP into complicity with gender-selective abortions and Medicaid fraud.

Hello again, Steve:

I think what we've established here and in the other thread, is that even though you proclaim that you don't watch FOX News, you buy what they're selling, hook, line and sinker.

excon

I never said I didn't watch Fox News. On the contrary, the wife and I watch the morning show because it's twice as fun as those other morning shows. What I said I don't watch is Hannity or when he was on, Beck. But what the.. I give you a link to the Daily Caller and you claim Fox is behind it? Dude.

P.S. Funny how you guys jump complain about a mythincal war on women but deny the real, obvious example of the left's war on women I keep posting. I guess you can justify it because you don't consider conservative or unborn women "real" or "authentic" women. That is how things are with you leftists, if you don't vote blindly to remain in their grips or toe the party line - you don't matter. I on the other hand believe everyone matters.

but deny the real, obvious example of the left's war on women I keep posting. I guess you can justify it because you don't consider conservative or unborn women "real" or "authentic" women.
No, we're saying that never happened.

Live Action's New Planned Parenthood Attack Manufactures "Widespread" Sex-Selective Abortion Problem (http://mediamatters.org/blog/201205290001)

Media Matters for America (MMfA) is a politically progressive media watchdog
Media Matters for America - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Matters_for_America)

That about says it all .

I realize that's all you need to hear to stop listening. Most of us like to be progressive instead of regressive.

I realize that's all you need to hear to stop listening. Most of us like to be progressive instead of regressive.

Conservatism is not regressive. We just like things that work instead screwing everything up.

We just like things that work instead screwing everything up.I'm pretty sure everyone wants that.

Then explain the federal government.

Then explain the federal government.
Any federal government, regardless of what party is in charge. You guys have lost control. You will get what the big corps want you to get.

No, we're saying that never happened.

And PP fired this staffer (http://www.lifenews.com/2012/05/29/planned-parenthood-we-wont-deny-women-sex-selection-abortions/) and "all staff members...were immediately scheduled for retraining" because the "hoax patient encounter" "never happened." Bwa ha ha!!

But you said that there are targeting females for abortion, why would they fire someone for doing exactly what you say their mandate is?

Cya... they got caught so they found a sacrificial lamb .
I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!

So you still think they are systematically eliminating women?

Over a million abortions are performed in the US every year. Forty percent (http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/fb_induced_abortion.html) of all pregnancies in the US are terminated. How many do you suppose are female? There are currently 108 boys born for every 100 girls (http://www.lozierinstitute.org/2012/05/sex-selection-abortion-worldwide-son-bias-fueled-by-population-policy-abuse/) in the US. Why might that be?

Forty percent[/U][/URL] of all pregnancies in the US are terminated. See, this is another example of the gross misrepresentations that you do.
The statistic says:

Nearly half of pregnancies among American women are unintended, and about four in 10 of these are terminated by abortion
It's the accidental pregnancies that are terminated by abortion by the women's choice, not 40% of all pregnancies as you try to make people believe. Geez.

There are currently 108 boys born for every 100 girls (http://www.lozierinstitute.org/2012/05/sex-selection-abortion-worldwide-son-bias-fueled-by-population-policy-abuse/) in the US. Why might that be?Because, as your source shows "Skewed sex ratios (108), favoring boys over girls, have appeared in U.S. subpopulations mirroring the international data (Chinese-Americans, Korean-Americans, and Filipino- Americans)". Get the Asians to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want.

See, this is another example of the gross misrepresentations that you do.
The statistic says:

It's the accidental pregnancies that are terminated by abortion by the women's choice, not 40% of all pregnancies as you try to make people believe. Geez.

Excuse me, 40 percent of unintended pregnancies are terminated. Unintentional errors are not "gross misrepresentations." Gross misrepresentations are when you accuse me of gross misrepresentations.

Get the Asians to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want.

Well that's about as racist as it gets.

But let's continue your quote shall we?


Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund of Columbia University identified these trends, including a male bias of 50% among third-order births, in U.S. populations of Chinese, Korean, and Asian-American heritage. “We interpret the found deviation in favor of sons to be evidence of sex selection, most likely at the prenatal stage,” they write.[2] This fact has prompted several U.S. states to ban sex selection abortion in their jurisdictions. These states include Illinois (2008), Pennsylvania (2008), Oklahoma (2010), and Arizona (2011).

Worldwide Condemnation

Cultural policies to deter sex selection abortion have been pursued by countries around the world for many years, and legislative bans have been adopted in many countries. Abortions for sex selection are illegal in China, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, India, the United Kingdom (which has banned sex selection abortion for “social reasons”), and Vietnam. While legislative action is not enough to undo centuries-long cultural biases, it has often proven to be the threshold step for galvanizing cultural reform.

Public Support for Action

Besides the legislation that has been enacted in diverse regions of the world, evidence exists that legislative bans on sex selection abortions have broad support. A March 2006 Zogby poll found that 86 percent of Americans believe that an abortion performed because of the sex of the developing child should be illegal. A LifeCanada poll conducted by Environics Research and released in October 2011 showed that an astonishing 92 percent of Canadians thought that sex selection abortions should not be legal in Canada.[3] To this can be added the new poll released on May 16, 2012 by the Charlotte Lozier Institute, which found that 77 percent of American adults (80 percent of women) would support making sex-selection abortion illegal when that is the sole reason for seeking an abortion.

Seems you Canucks overwhelmingly agree with me that this actual war on women should be illegal, so let's address that instead of this manufactured war, eh?

Well that's about as racist as it gets.

Why racist? Asians prefer male children for several reasons embedded in their culture. Just like American farmers used to prefer male children to help on the farm. Girls were fairly worthless except as cooks for the harvest and threshing crews--and to produce more sons.

Why racist? Asians prefer male children for several reasons embedded in their culture. Just like American farmers used to prefer male children to help on the farm. Girls were fairly worthless except as cooks for the the harvest and threshing crews--and to produce more sons.

Funny how me and tom appear to be the only ones here that don't find girls "worthless" or disposable, but I digress.

OK, imagine me saying get the Blacks to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Or get the Mexicans to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Is it racist now?

Funny how me and tom appear to be the only ones here that don't find girls "worthless" or disposable, but I digress.
Apparently you aren't a soybean or wheat farmer seventy-five to a hundred years ago.

OK, imagine me saying get the Blacks to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Or get the Mexicans to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Is it racist now?
What do we want?

Apparently you aren't a soybean or wheat farmer seventy-five to a hundred years ago.

I'm 51, so no. But my grandparents were and they had 10 kids, 6 girls (including my mom) and 4 boys. They didn't seem to worry about the girls being "fairly worthless."


What do we want?

I didn't ask that, I asked "Is it racist now?" Well?

I'm 51, so no. But my grandparents were and they had 10 kids, 6 girls (including my mom) and 4 boys. They didn't seem to worry about the girls being "fairly worthless."
I betcha your grandpa would have preferred boys if he owned a farm. If he did own one, did the girls drive the tractor and do field work?

I didn't ask that, I asked "Is it racist now?" Well?
I didn't realize it was a racist thing before. Indians prefer sons. Do you know why?

I betcha your grandpa would have preferred boys if he owned a farm. If he did own one, did the girls drive the tractor and do field work?

I believe I just said he was a farmer and didn't seem to worry about the girls being "fairly worthless." I don't know what all the girls did, I know my mom played basketball (http://www.okgenweb.org/~photogallery/Schools/dukegbb194344.htm). So? I understand the preference for boys but you seem to be trying to distract from the point, which is where the actual war on women is taking place.


I didn't realize it was a racist thing before. Indians prefer sons. Do you know why?

I don't care why. All I know was based on the left's own standards NK's comment was as racist as it gets.

I don't care why. All I know was based on the left's own standards NK's comment was as racist as it gets.
Well, you should care. Many first-generation Asians have brought their cultural and family values to this country and are trying to uphold them in the face of the personal freedom their children are otherwise experiencing. Sharia law is one of those brought-over values. Female genital mutilation is another. Asian boys don’t need the dowries that can cripple a family financially. Boys are supposed to stay home after marrying and help care for aging parents. Hinduism dictates that only boys can light their parents’ funeral pyres.

Yeah and those cultural preference are gone in a generation ;just like most immigrant groups in the past ;their children love being American and all that implies.

But the point is that PP was caught on tape speaking of the option to abort based on gender preference. I guess that comes under the pro-choice category ?

Well, you should care. Many first-generation Asians have brought their cultural and family values to this country and are trying to uphold them in the face of the personal freedom their children are otherwise experiencing. Sharia law is one of those brought-over values. Female genital mutilation is another. Asian boys don’t need the dowries that can cripple a family financially. Boys are supposed to stay home after marrying and help care for aging parents. Hinduism dictates that only boys can light their parents’ funeral pyres.

Ah, glad you agree with me that certain cultural norms being imported to this country like Sharia law are a threat.

Now about this war on women here, try to stop dancing around and tell us who should we be worried about, those aborting women for gender preference, union leaders smashing piñatas with Nikki Haley's face on them, porno rags photoshopping and publishing vulgar images of conservative women, a president who wants a country full of Julias (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=51265) dependent from cradle to grave or conservatives trying to give that baby girl a chance and empowering her to be a strong, independent woman?

My beef is parents who don't know how to parent so that their kids don't get a good start before school, eat too much junk food, don't know how to write a thank-you note or even say the words, feel entitled about anything and everything, and don't know how to keep their clothes on once they turn 12. If you can fix the parents and how they parent, you're on your way to nirvana.

I don't care why. All I know was based on the left's own standards NK's comment was as racist as it gets.

How is it racist?
Remember, I said : "Get the Asians to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want."
So, is that your plan? To change what asian people do? Since they are the ones that are causing the statistics that you don't like.

Nirvana right next door to utopia

Seems you Canucks overwhelmingly agree with me that this actual war on women should be illegaNope, that's not what the statistic says at all. You made sh!t up again.

Ah, glad you agree with me that certain cultural norms being imported to this country like Sharia law are a threat.OMG! Could you be any more racist!?

So are we saying it is anti-female racism from the womb or more a preference of partiality of parents to their own children being born based on, which sex of a child will be more beneficial to the survival of the family? Not that I agree with all abortions and maybe we should revisit again and again what happens to many girls after they are born and even what happens to many young boys. I've heard it said from soldiers coming back from Saudi/Iraq when we were over there that the mindset among some of the rich and powerful over there is that, girls are for making babies and boys are for pleasure slaves. I'm only sharing what I've heard as perhaps some of you have heard the same. Information became available when we were there through intelligences and information gathering. And what is being done to the innocent in other countries including America with mainly white slavery of women and girls disappearances, especially being taken into foreign countries, never to be seen again though some have escaped. Yet governments keep too quiet about it all not to rock the political boat on a global scale. I'm a woman and I'm not so much concerned about my rights and privileges, but more about the future of young daughters worldwide, living and yet to be born.

Deleted by user

Deleted by user

Ending the practice of sex selection gendercide/infanticide abortions should be something we all agree about. This is just one step closer to the eugenist's dreams come true .

Ending the practice of sex selection gendercide/infanticide abortions should be something we all agree about. This is just one step closer to the eugenist's dreams come true .

So you are suggesting we end the war on men

OK, imagine me saying get the Blacks to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Or get the Mexicans to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want. Is it racist now?

The answer to that question would be, no. There is an important difference between race and culture.

Firstly, there is no Mexican race any more than there is a French race, Australian race or American race. When classifying people according to country we are generally talking about culture.

Secondly,scientists have no agreement agree as to how many races make up humanity. It is much easier to determine how many cultural groups exist in the world.

Race has to do with genetic code. Culture has to do with the learning and experience. You can learn a culture just as easily as you can unlearn the said culture.

Tut

Now about this war on women here, try to stop dancing around and tell us who should we be worried about, those aborting women for gender preference, union leaders smashing pinatas with Nikki Haley's face on them, porno rags photoshopping and publishing vulgar images of conservative women, a president who wants a country full of Julias (http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=51265) dependent from cradle to grave or conservatives trying to give that baby girl a chance and empowering her to be a strong, independent woman?


Hi Steve,


There is nothing to worry about because most of you examples show how particular interest groups and individuals are waging a war on women. This is very much different to saying there is a policy in place that wages war on women. Quite rightly, the OP was about policy.

In the end policy turned into legislation is all that matters.

In order to show there is a Democrat war on women you would need to show how these examples have manifested themselves into policy.

Can hitting Piñatas be translated into some sort of policy? Do leftist magazine opinions translate themselves into policy?

Over to you.

Tut

My beef is parents who don't know how to parent so that their kids don't get a good start before school, eat too much junk food, don't know how to write a thank-you note or even say the words, feel entitled about anything and everything, and don't know how to keep their clothes on once they turn 12. If you can fix the parents and how they parent, you're on your way to nirvana.

So you just don't want to answer the question.

How is it racist?
Remember, I said : "Get the Asians to change their cultural values and you'll get what you want."

Exactly, and if I had said "get blacks to change their cultural values" my post would have been removed and I would have received an "infraction" for racist remarks. YOu on the other hand can get away with it.


So, is that your plan? To change what asian people do? Since they are the ones that are causing the statistics that you don't like.

Why would it be my plan, you're the one that brought it up.

Nope, that's not what the statistic says at all. You made sh!t up again.

What part of "a LifeCanada poll conducted by Environics Research and released in October 2011 showed that an astonishing 92 percent of Canadians thought that sex selection abortions should not be legal in Canada" did I make up?

OMG! Could you be any more racist!!!??

Islam is not a race. Duh.

Hi Steve,


There is nothing to worry about because most of you examples show how particular interest groups and individuals are waging a war on women. This is very much different to saying there is a policy in place that wages war on women. Quite rightly, the OP was about policy.

In the end policy turned into legislation is all that matters.

In order to show there is a Democrat war on women you would need to show how these examples have manifested themselves into policy.

Can hitting Pinatas be translated into some sort of policy? Do leftist magazine opinions translate themselves into policy?

Over to you.

Tut

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect children, and in a large number of cases the emotional well-being of the mother who might abort her child? The one that attempts to preserve religious freedom (http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/224398/the-arrogance-of-obamas-accommodation/1) over a non-issue (http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/224398/the-arrogance-of-obamas-accommodation/1) of expanding access to contraception? The one that bans gender-selective abortions?

I'll take a policy that protects children and my constitutional rights over behavior that attacks and demeans women any day. The left talks a good game but their actual behavior towards women speaks far more than their political pandering.

Islam is not a race. Duh.I know, I was making fun of people like yourself that see racism everywhere. :-)

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect childrenHello again, Steve:

When a woman has a LEGAL right to DO something, and one segment of the population is doing everything it can to STOP them, they think it's a war on women... Sounds reasonable to me.

Frankly, it's a matter of semantics.. You have your own words, and they make sense too. I mean, who's against protecting children??

But, if we can drop the language, what we have here is a fundamental conflict between a pregnant women and the child she's carrying. That's all it is. One side champion's the rights of the women, and the other side champion's the rights of the unborn..

But, that's the problem.. You cannot recognize ONE set of rights without denying the other side its rights. We tried it one way for a long time and it didn't work. We're trying it this way, and it's not working either... What? You thought I had a solution? I'd just like things to calm down, because we have to decide one way or the other.. But, didn't we DO that already??

excon

I know, I was making fun of people like yourself that see racism everywhere. :-)

There you go with your gross misrepresentations again.

Hello again, Steve:

When a woman has a LEGAL right to DO something, and one segment of the population is doing everything it can to STOP them, they think it's a war on women... Sounds reasonable to me.

No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further.


Frankly, it's a matter of semantics.. You have your own words, and they make sense too. I mean, who's against protecting children??

Whose against protecting women from abuse?


But, if we can drop the language, what we have here is a fundamental conflict between a pregnant women and the child she's carrying. That's all it is. One side champion's the rights of the women, and the other side champion's the rights of the unborn..

You forget, I've seen close up the emotional trauma after a mother aborted her child. It's not just a choice, ex, it's not as cut and dried as either side wants to make it. There are lasting effects, so sue me for leaning toward the side of life for the child and emotional peace for the mother. Quite frankly, I don't see how anyone with a conscience could be any different.

Exactly what policy is waging a war on women? The one that attempts to protect children, and in a large number of cases the emotional well-being of the mother who might abort her child? The one that attempts to preserve religious freedom (http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/224398/the-arrogance-of-obamas-accommodation/1) over a non-issue (http://theweek.com/bullpen/column/224398/the-arrogance-of-obamas-accommodation/1) of expanding access to contraception? The one that bans gender-selective abortions?

I'll take a policy that protects children and my constitutional rights over behavior that attacks and demeans women any day. The left talks a good game but their actual behavior towards women speaks far more than their political pandering.

I think there are a number of issues that need addressing

In answer to your first question. I don't know what policies are being waged against women. You would need to address the original posting to answer that question.

Secondly, policy that protests the unborn is a move in the right direction from my point of view. However, this does not lessen any policy that discriminates against women. Provided there is such a policy, but again you need to address the original posting.

If there are policies that discriminate against women then posting counter examples, doesn't negate the former.

Thirdly, religious freedom and rights of individuals only serve to complicate this particular issue. The problem from my point of view is when we attempt to reduce a whole lot of issues into a single category of understanding.

Tut

I think there are a number of issues that need addressing

In answer to your first question. I don't know what policies are being waged against women. You would need to address the original posting to answer that question.

Secondly, policy that protests the unborn is a move in the right direction from my point of view. However, this does not lessen any policy that discriminates against women. Provided there is such a policy, but again you need to address the original posting.

If there are policies that discriminate against women then posting counter examples, doesn't negate the former.

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further."

In other words, the OP is a cure in search of a disease.


Thirdly, religious freedom and rights of individuals only serve to complicate this particular issue. The problem from my point of view is when we attempt to reduce a whole lot of issues into a single category of understanding.

From my point of view the problem is manufacturing a war that doesn't exist while ignoring a real constitutional war that does exist.

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion, Hello again, Steve:

You could have convinced me about contraceptives.. Your ban has not YET hit the table... But, abortion?? Dude! You mean you'll be HAPPY if abortion is only "curtailed"??

Uhh, no you won't. What happened to honest Steve?

excon

Hello again, Steve:

You coulda convinced me about contraceptives.. Your ban has not YET hit the table... But, abortion??? Dude! You mean you'll be HAPPY if abortion is only "curtailed"???

Uhh, no you won't. What happened to honest Steve??

excon

What do you mean, brother, I just was honest about abortion not being as cut and dried as either side wants to make it sound. Where was your likewise honest response?

I believe I've said it before, I hate abortion, it's a pox on our country - but I don't foresee it ever being illegal. Doesn't stop me from trying to change hearts and minds.

Like I said to excon, "No one is trying to outlaw abortion, contraceptives or equal pay or stop protecting women from violence. You're just making stuff up because we don't see a need for more redundant laws and expanding government further."

In other words, the OP is a cure in search of a disease.


Yes, I would have said this is what should be addressed.




while ignoring a real constitutional war that does exist

.

Sorry about splitting your sentence. But that would deserve a post on its own.

Tut

I'm not totally against abortion either when it is justified for reasons of sexual violations and threats to the mother's life. Yet I have read stories where it was the mother who decided to have her baby when doctors were telling her of the danger of it. Mothers gave birth and mother and baby were fine. Then of course at other times not, either the mother died or both mother and baby died. So risk is taken in life for many reasons. Then we have selection sex births and I guess no one wants to here this part I'm about to share, but since I believe there is a higher power, here goes, but you may need to get out of your logical thinking to embrace it... We all existed as spirits 'Before' we came into earth life through birth by receiving a physical body. It is said at the moment of conception a flash of blue light appears at that very moment. We can ask, when does a baby become viable? We seem to look at this on a physical level only and I think it is possible that the flash of blue light that is seen is perhaps the aura... the beginning of a physical existence, the body and 'god stuff' being the aura. Now, I do not know that the actual spirit appointed to the developing physical body is capable to actually enter, somehow, the developing baby at the moment of conception, but I do believe it is possible the aura, which I call 'god stuff' (maybe someone else coined this too, I just can't remember right now) is evidence of perhaps a spirit embryo of the spirit which does enter at the very moment of conception and perhaps even part of the soul is created at this time. When we choose to abort the beginning of a physical life we are also aborting the beginning of a spiritual life appointed to a physical body or more correctly a physical body appointed to an infinite spiritual body. After all it is said, (paraphrasing) “we are spiritual beings having a physical experience.” In reality to me, a war on life is not only a war against women, but a war against men and a war against mankind. Now you can go back to your limited debating, but there is a bigger picture out there.

No sir, PP does not believe in “sex selection motivated by gender bias” - although the question is what other bias could there be for sex selection? - but another clinic was happy to advise on how to do just that. Who's going to get fired this time?

6Fz2KLSxDzc

And by the way, the president who opposed the Illinois Born Alive bill also opposes a ban on gender-selective abortions (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/legislation-about-gender-selection-and-abortion-todays-q-for-os-wh-5302012/). Naturally.

Yep, those darn Repubs are still waging that war on women.

Why are you up in arms about PP when the problem is the mother/parents?

Why are you up in arms about PP when the problem is the mother/parents?

Why do you defend scum like PP?

Why do you defend scum like PP?

a) I didn't, you're making stuff up again.
b) the parents are making the decision, not PP

Do you blame McDonald's for making you fat?

Whatever, dude, not playing your games today. I'll just post again in case someone cares to comment on PP's ethics problem instead of blaming the mother.


No sir, PP does not believe in “sex selection motivated by gender bias” - although the question is what other bias could there be for sex selection? - but another clinic was happy to advise on how to do just that. Who's going to get fired this time?

6Fz2KLSxDzc

And by the way, the president who opposed the Illinois Born Alive bill also opposes a ban on gender-selective abortions (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/05/legislation-about-gender-selection-and-abortion-todays-q-for-os-wh-5302012/). Naturally.

Yep, those darn Repubs are still waging that war on women.

Comments? Besides blaming the mother for Planned Parenthood's ethics problems?

It's right there on the screenshot: the woman (mother) is saying that she is doing sex selection, not PP.

So you believe there are no bad reasons for an abortion? You condone sex-selective abortions?

Wow, you argue like a women, evading the question and putting words in my mouth all the time. I guess if you continuously evade the question then it must have some merit.

I understand you have a serious hatred for PP, so much that it clouds everything else. Have fun with that. I do not think they are scum. I'm not filled with hatred.

FYI

question mark (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/question+mark)
n.
A punctuation symbol (?) written at the end of a sentence or phrase to indicate a direct question. Also called interrogation point.

I know, I asked one here: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/war-women-662145-10.html#post3135308

Whatever dude, feel free to argue amongst yourself.

Hello again, Steve:

I recall that you thought whacking a piñata with the face of a Republican woman is emblematic of the left's "war on women".

Then surely you'll agree that, "Let's Hurl Some Acid At Those Female Democratic Senators (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/31/jay-townsend-nan-hayworth-acid-war-on-women_n_1560693.html)", would indicate a right wing ", would indicate a right wing ". No?

excon

I find that highly despicable and I'm sure you'll find that once again, the majority of conservatives will rightly hold this idiot accountable. When the left holds their misogynists and other miscreants accountable in like fashion then we can talk.

Nan Hayworth is too good a Rep to have that idiot as a spokesman. She should fire him. I'll send her an email today saying such.

Two more clinics caught (http://www.lifenews.com/2012/06/06/abortion-clinics-arrange-illegal-sex-selection-abortions/), this time in Arizona where sex-selective abortions are banned.

1q6_Nx3f4EU


A third video in a series devoted to exposing how the abortion industry is willing to arrange sex-selection abortions for women who seek them shows two National Abortion Federation-affiliated clinics in Arizona agreeing to break state law and perform an illegal sex-selective abortion.

Live Action has released the third video in the series after two other videos exposed how staff at Planned Parenthood abortion centers agreed to facilitate sex-selection abortions.

The new footage shows two NAF members, Camelback Family Planning in Phoenix and the Tucson Women’s Center in Tucson, promising to ignore the law and perform a sex-selective abortion and coaching a woman to lie on official paperwork to conceal the illegal abortion.

When the woman purportedly seeking to abort her girl and try again for a boy explains this at the Camelback abortion clinic, a counselor named Barb advises, “Don’t tell us that, because we don’t want to know.” Referring to the clinic’s abortion doctor, Gabrielle Goodrick, Barb says, “You can tell her, she’s gonna tell you the same thing, just: Don’t let it be down! She’s really good about that. You’ll like that about her.”

At the Tucson clinic, the surgical assistant Francisco tells the woman, “We could lose our license,” but agrees to cover-up her sex-selective abortion. “I’ll just forget about it,” he says, “But just be sure not to mention it” to the abortion doctor–“Don’t even mention it to him.”

Sex-selective abortion is a felony in Arizona and abortion clinics may not knowingly perform a sex-selective abortion in Arizona, or solicit or accept money to do so.

Live Action president Lila Rose urges Arizona authorities to enforce the state’s sex-selection ban and informed LifeNews that her group has sent the full footage from the Arizona clinics to the state Attorney General, Tom Horne, and to local law enforcement officials.

“Sex-selective abortion is a global search-and-destroy mission against little girls that is spreading at an alarming rate,” she said. “While we wait for Congress to pass the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act to ban sex-selective abortion in the U.S., state authorities should vigorously enforce Arizona’s law. The clinics supporting sex-selective abortion should be investigated, prosecuted, de-funded, and de-licensed immediately.”

Not only have the videos implicated Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business, they now have show how NAF-affiliated clinics are willing to break the law and arrange sex-selection abortions as well. NAF is the professional trade group for hundreds of abortion clinics not affiliated with Planned Parenthood that operate in the U.S. and Canada. Many NAF board members are current or former Planned Parenthood officials, and Planned Parenthood representatives frequently play a prominent role at NAF annual meetings.

The first video detailed a planned Parenthood staffer at an Austin,Texas facility urging a sex-selection abortion and a second video shows staff at Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger clinic in New York City helping arrange one.

Planned Parenthood has responded to the first video by essentially saying it will do abortions for any reason and adding that the staffer in the video violated unnamed policies and has since been fired from her position. A top Planned Parenthood official recently defended its decision to oppose a bill in Congress that would have banned sex-selection abortions.

If 20/20 were doing this... never mind, the lamestream media could care less about the real war on women. And no, don't tell me to blame the mother. Abortion clinics all over the country have been breaking laws for years and that demands "awareness" - a word you leftists should be able to relate to. But go ahead, keep pretending that the right is engaged in a war on women while excusing your own.

Oh and an update . Nan Hayworth forced the idiot to resign.

PP as we all know does it's founder proud. Margaret Sanger has her place in Hades with the pointy tailed minions.

Margaret Sanger has her place in Hades with the pointy tailed minions.Right there with ex-president Bush.

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/us/politics/senate-republicans-block-pay-equity-bill.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120606)

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/us/politics/senate-republicans-block-pay-equity-bill.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120606)

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Why don't you go south of the border it appears your war on drugs has become a war on women

why don't you go south of the border it appears your war on drugs has become a war on womenHello clete:

Huh?

excon

In a statement, President Obama said, “It is incredibly disappointing that in this make-or-break moment for the middle class, Senate Republicans put partisan politics ahead of American women and their families.”


In the Obama economy anyone is lucky to have a job to get a pay check . The Equal Pay Act of 1963 already forbids pay discrimination .So all Obama has to do is unleash Eric Holder's Justice Dept if there is a suspicion of pay discrimination. But he won't do that because this is not about pay discrimination at all. It should be renamed the Ambulance Chasing ,Slip and Fall Lawyer's Job Security Bill.
Instead of jerking around with these fringe issues ,why doesn't Obama tell Harry Reid to actually pass a budget ?
Now ,if in fact a women makes so much less than a man ;as an employer ,why would you hire a man when you could pay the women so much less ?

Hello again:

Senate Republicans Again Block Pay Equity Bill. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/us/politics/senate-republicans-block-pay-equity-bill.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120606)

Steve thinks what ONE person does against a woman is a war... I, however, think that what CONGRESS does against women is REALLY a war.

excon

Hi Ex,

Yes, I mentioned this previously. Steve's examples show that particular individuals and some individuals within corporations have a political leaning. It also might show these individuals and organizations are waging a war of some type.

It is important to point out these examples in order to create awareness.

Nonetheless, these examples, don't address the issue at hand. We know individuals are organizations wage war much of the time, but how does this trace back to policy, legislation or proposed policy? This is what needs to be demonstrated.

I used the example of hitting the Piñata and asked the question how did this event come about as the result of policy and legislation? I think it would be difficult to look at these events and trace them back to legislation.

I used the example of hitting the Pinata and asked the question how did this event come about as the result of policy and legislation? I think it would be difficult to look at these events and trace them back to legislation.


And I believe I said something about policy means nothing if in practice you're waging a war on women. This clinic in AZ has a policy to follow state law and refuse sex-selective abortions, but in practice they do it anyway. It's the same with Democrats in Congress and the White House, they promote a policy of equality but in practice still women get the short end of the stick.

That's a huge problem I have with today's liberalism, "do as I say and not as I do" is their policy.

That's a huge problem I have with today's liberalism, "do as I say and not as I do" is their policy.Actually the same thing could be said of christianity... or conservatism... or any other group of people since you'll always find some not following the doctrine.

Love it when YOU conservatives do things and blame us for it. Instead of a jobs bill we get an abortion bill, and we blame the liberals, particularly the President. You find a bad egg, and blame the president. You see a gay guy you blame the president. Obstruct and blame that's all you guys can do.

All of a sudden there is a deficit, blame the poor. No jobs, blame the government. Every time a conservative does something, somebody else is to blame. Call them on it, they blame you and they call foul. Lets face it, conservatives get mad when you tell them the truth, and then blame YOU for not listening to the truth. Gut the government, starve the beast. Get out of there lives, but waste a bunch of time making sure a female has a baby so they both can be barefoot and pregnant, and poor... And blame her. Ain't no jobs bill, yet they ask where are the jobs? There are not enough conservatives to have a president, so purge the rolls of anybody with a funny name, 100, 000, or a million at a time, and that's fair because Mickey Mouse voted 50 times. Gun club ID is perfect, student ID is illegal.

This ain't no war on women, it's a war on anybody who ain't on the loony tune right, and it's the liberals fault, especially Obama. What does he know about true Americans! He is trying to destroy America and thank God the conservatives are going to take it back from the foreigners, and liberals.

Like Bill said, when the right screws it up, the left is there to fix it!! Trouble is, we know they will screw it up. It's there RIGHT to screw it up. That's why America needs a safety net in the first place!

Actually the exact same thing could be said of christianity...or conservatism... or any other group of people since you'll always find some not following the doctrine.

True. But I'm not blind to my hypocrisy like the left is.

Love it when YOU conservatives do things and blame us for it. Instead of a jobs bill we get an abortion bill, and we blame the liberals, particularly the President. You find a bad egg, and blame the president. You see a gay guy you blame the president. Obstruct and blame thats all you guys can do.

All of a sudden there is a deficit, blame the poor. No jobs, blame the government. Every time a conservative does something, somebody else is to blame. Call them on it, they blame you and they call foul. Lets face it, conservatives get mad when you tell them the truth, and then blame YOU for not listening to the truth. Gut the government, starve the beast. Get out of there lives, but waste a bunch of time making sure a female has a baby so they both can be barefoot and pregnant, and poor........................................And blame her. Ain't no jobs bill, yet they ask where are the jobs? There are not enough conservatives to have a president, so purge the rolls of anybody with a funny name, 100, 000, or a million at a time, and thats fair because Mickey Mouse voted 50 times. Gun club ID is perfect, student ID is illegal.

This ain't no war on women, its a war on anybody who ain't on the loony tune right, and its the liberals fault, especially Obama. What does he know about true Americans! He is trying to destroy America and thank God the conservatives are going to take it back from the foreigners, and liberals.

Like Bill said, when the right screws it up, the left is there to fix it!!! Trouble is, we know they will screw it up. Its there RIGHT to screw it up. Thats why America needs a safety net in the first place!

Funny how you guys on the left never want to acknowledge when you're caught in a glaring hypocrisy. Oh no, let's deflect, distract and spew a few clichés instead of addressing the issue at hand.

Funny how you guys on the left never want to acknowledge when you're caught in a glaring hypocrisy. Oh no, let's deflect, distract and spew a few cliches instead of addressing the issue at hand.He doesn't do anything different than the conservatives do on this forum. Nothing different at all.

He doesn't do anything different than the conservatives do on this forum. Nothing different at all.

Hogwash.

That's a sound argument! LOL!

How's the baseball pool coming along? How's your dog?

Just calling 'em like I see 'em, and I see me destroying everyone in baseball. My dog is fine.

Hello clete:

Huh??

excon

Just referring to an article I saw the other day where they say there are more women casualities than men in mexico as a result of the war on drugs

I'm conservative leaning, but I would have a real hard time being a member of the Republican party if I were American. They are no longer the party of Eisenhower, Ford or even Reagan. I can't think of any other Western country where a supposedly mainstream conservative party is controlled by extreme right-wing, religious fanatics and morons. I hope that more moderate conservatives will be able to steer the party in the right direction, but it doesn't look hopeful.

Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Funny how you guys on the left never want to acknowledge when you're caught in a glaring hypocrisy. Oh no, let's deflect, distract and spew a few clichés instead of addressing the issue at hand.

Throw rocks, and expect to get rocked. Casual debate, we debate the facts, and can find them through the BS on both sides! So what do you want to do? Talk or throw rocks? Makes no difference to me.

To the war on women, legislatures, and the congress is making them pretty mad I would say. The minorities are mad, so are the citizens. I think we all are tired of OUR elected politicians serving some one other than US!

I'm conservative leaning, but I would have a real hard time being a member of the Republican party if I were American. They are no longer the party of Eisenhower, Ford or even Reagan. I can't think of any other Western country where a supposedly mainstream conservative party is controlled by extreme right-wing, religious fanatics and morons. I hope that more moderate conservatives will be able to steer the party in the right direction, but it doesn't look hopeful.

See, even conservatives are not satisfied.

There is a lot of polarisation of views today and much negative thinking. The tactics of fear have been working. The idea of there being a consensus and some middle ground has left the political arena. Even if politicians agree on a solution they differ on the details and so nothing is done

In sports it's the stall tactic, run the clock out, and then win by a point, or a few million bucks. This started on the inauguration of the current president, and the rocks have been flying since. The goal, to make this a one term president, and regain the house, senate, and white house.

Give more power to rich elites by keeping the Bush tax cuts, and making everything privatized. That's the agenda.

In sports its the stall tactic, run the clock out, and then win by a point, or a few million bucks. This started on the inauguration of the current president, and the rocks have been flying since. The goal, to make this a one term president, and regain the house, senate, and white house.

Give more power to rich elites by keeping the Bush tax cuts, and making everything privatized. Thats the agenda.

Privatisation is the centre piece of your economy, it is big enough to have services provided by private enterprise. Tax cuts are not a bad thing if you have a balanced budget but someone must pay for last years benefits and the mistakes of past presidents. Since many of these mistakes have been republican they should pay their share.

Let's get back to basics, there is no such thing as a free lunch

Throw rocks, and expect to get rocked. Casual debate, we debate the facts, and can find them thru the BS on both sides!! So what do you want to do? Talk or throw rocks? Makes no difference to me.

To the war on women, legislatures, and the congress is making them pretty mad I would say. The minorities are mad, so are the citizens. I think we all are tired of OUR elected politicians serving some one other than US!

Video evidence of a clinic violating the law to perform sex-selective abortions isn't rock throwing. It's sunshine, and it deserves more than a clichéd deflection.

See, even conservatives are not satisfied.

Earl doesn't get a vote here but hey, I wish Reagan was still running things, too. He made us feel good about being Americans and he was a leader. Out front, not from behind.

And he acted Presidential... He didn't make crude sexual innuendo jokes at gay fundraisers.

Hello again,

Wow. Did you know that you can REGULATE what a vagina DOES, but you can't say the word?? That's the way it is in Michigan. (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/michigan-state-rep-lisa-brown-silenced-vagina-comments-article-1.1096480)

But, there's no war on women... Look over there. Obama is doing something..

excon

Yeah, that was real classy comment to make on the house floor. Personally, I don't care if she says the word vagina or not, but the fact is abortion regulations are not about her vagina any more than her day long ban from speaking on the house floor is about the word vagina. The first is about the child inside and the second is about decorum (http://sbmblog.typepad.com/sbm-blog/2012/06/reference-to-vagina-vasectomy-earns-two-state-reps-a-day-of-silence.html).


It is the responsibility of the Majority Floor Leader, the presiding officer and every Representative to maintain the decorum of the House... Stamas has informed Minority Floor Leader Segal that Reps. Brown and Byrum will not be recognized to speak on the House floor today after being gaveled down for their comments and actions yesterday that failed to maintain the decorum of the House of Representatives.

Under Rep. Stamas’ floor leadership, the House Republicans have allowed more debate on the House floor than ever seen in the past few sessions when House Democrats were in charge. House Republicans often go beyond simply allowing debate by welcoming open and passionate discussion of the issues before this chamber. The only way we can continue doing so, however, is to ensure that the proper level of maturity and civility are maintained on the House floor.

is to ensure that the proper level of maturity and civility are maintained on the House floor.

Sure wish that happened here, fallorn hope

Yep, those darn Republicans sure are waging a war on women.


Laura Bush’s fight for women (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathleen-parker-laura-bushs-fight-for-women/2012/06/19/gJQA8v70oV_print.html)
By Kathleen Parker, Published: June 19

By now, most sentient Americans have heard about the war on women. That is, the Republican war on women, which has been framed as a battle waged by stodgy, old white guys who want to deny women reproductive freedom.

One can debate the validity of these claims, but for now, let’s give equal time to the other war on women. This one is manned not by men but by a dwindling number of women whose understanding of equality is so narrowly defined that only a certain kind of woman can be recognized as having achieved anything of value.

Twenty-two such women recently wrote a letter to the Sewall-Belmont House and Museum, protesting an award to be given to former first lady Laura Bush. The Alice Award, which honors a woman who has helped other women, previously has gone to Hillary Clinton, Katie Couric, Nancy Pelosi and Olympia Snowe.

Leading the charge of “The 22,” as we shall call them, is Sonia Pressman Fuentes, co-founder of the National Organization for Women, who described her reaction upon reading that Bush was being honored as “a sudden onset of Alzheimer’s.”

Well, at least she didn’t say the vapors.

“I couldn’t believe my eyes,” she said. “It’s not partisan. I’m not complaining that she’s a Republican.” (Snowe, after all, is a Republican.) “I’m complaining that she’s never done anything for women to get this award.”

Uh, what? I personally have touted the former first lady's work on behalf of women, especially those oppressed in Islamic countries.


I have some personal knowledge of Bush’s significant efforts through the years. Although most associate her with literacy programs, no small detail, she also has made important inroads in women’s health. I was among three journalists, including Greta Van Susteren and Robin Roberts, who traveled with the first lady through the Middle East in 2007 to launch a breast cancer research and treatment initiative in Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates.

We watched as Bush met with women who whispered their secrets to her, in some cases saying for the first time the words “breast cancer.” These were women who couldn’t get a mammogram without their husband’s permission. Even saying the word “breast” was verboten and cancer a disease of shame. Afflicted women often were abandoned by their husbands, and their daughters were so stigmatized that they were deemed unsuitable for marriage.

We also watched as Bush met with heads of state, charming kings, sheiks and princes and helping them see the importance of women’s equality through access to health. Until she ventured forth on their behalf, 80 percent of women with breast cancer in the Middle East died. Now that number is lower.

Doesn’t this qualify as helping women?

Well? Doesn't it?


Bush has also been instrumental in helping women advance in Afghanistan through education and professional training programs she shepherds through the George W. Bush Institute. If that’s not enough, consider how, for the past several years, she has championed the plight of Burma’s Aung San Suu Kyi, who recently claimed the Nobel Peace Prize she won 21 years ago while under house arrest for her human rights activism...

These are the battles Laura Bush has chosen to fight, no less important than any other — and worthy of a Nobel of her own.

Damn right she is worthy. Unlike the president who started this GOP "war on women" myth, Mrs. Bush deserves the recognition for her accomplishments, not her potential. I'd put her accomplishments on behalf of women everywhere up against the whole lot of today's feminists. The lives she has touched are a far more substantial work than protesting Romney dressed as a giant pack of contraceptives (http://www.jammiewf.com/2012/stupid-giant-pack-of-birth-control-to-harass-romney/).

Hello again, Steve:

I have only one thing to say... Transvaginal probes... Or, is that two things?

excon

Hello again, Steve:

I have only one thing to say... Transvaginal probes... Or, is that two things?

excon

Trans Ex where do they go?

trans Ex where do they go?Hello clete:

The armpits..

excon

?? Kinky

Hello again, Steve:

I have only one thing to say... Transvaginal probes... Or, is that two things?

excon

Been there, covered that and you still have no leg to stand on. No one is requiring transvaginal probes. Time to quit dodging, buddy, and address the left's war on women. What about this attack on Laura??

What about this attack on Laura???Hello again, Steve:

I don't know... When we attacked Sarah Palin, you said it was because she was a woman. That wasn't true. Now you put this attack on Laura Bush into the same camp as Republicans attacking woman's rights.

You were wrong then, and you're wrong now.

excon

Seems to me that if a women has the right to kill a baby ,and a man doesn't ,then it's an unequal rights situation.

Seems to me that if a women has the right to kill a baby ,and a man doesn't ,then it's an unequal rights situation.Hello tom:

Women are not men, and the laws are going to reflect that.

excon

Seems to me since its in their bodies, it's their call, whether men like it or NOT!!

Been there, covered that and you still have no leg to stand on. No one is requiring transvaginal probes. Time to quit dodging, buddy, and address the left's war on women. What about this attack on Laura???

What about the rights attack on the present first lady?

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201050006

http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/right-wing-viciously-attack-michele-oba

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201201040001

As for your claim about T-probes not being required...

http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/article/2012/02/15/government-sanctioned-rape-in-state-virginia-and-texas

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0223/Abortion-wars-Virginia-retreats-on-invasive-probe-in-ultrasound-bill-video

... its not from a lack of trying!!

Seriously, you mock us for relying on Fox when we don't then offer Media Matters as a source? Bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha!!

Here's where another part of your diversion to attacks on Michelle falls flat, most of the time they're just jokes. You have no sense of humor? And none of that explains or justifies attacking Laura Bush as having done NOTHING for women when she damn well has done more than most. I don't see that NOW lady in the Middle East talking to Muslim women about breast cancer or discussing the need to empower women with sheiks and princes, do you? Just curious, what is Michelle and Hillary doing in that regard?

As for your "it isn't for a lack of trying" thing, feel free to show me where any of these laws require a transvaginal probe. Been asking and waiting since the first thread on this and I'm still waiting.

Now back to my question, what about this attack on Laura Bush? Is it deserved or has she earned the right to be honored for her on behalf of women?

Hello again, Steve:

I don't know... When we attacked Sarah Palin, you said it was because she was a woman. That wasn't true

No sir, I'm quite sure I said it was because she wasn't a liberal woman, and that's entirely true.


Now you put this attack on Laura Bush into the same camp as Republicans attacking woman's rights.

Um, it was you who titled this "the war on women." If attacking a woman that has done as much as Bush has for women isn't a "war on women" then I don't know what is.

I was right then and I'm right now.

Funny how you only saw the one source and ignored the others. Multiple sources that say the same is a general consensus, even though you say your side is joking around, and my side is throwing rocks and being direspectful.

That pretty selective, and self serving. Why not just say its wrong to attack a first lady? On that we can agree.

Funny how you only saw the one source and ignored the others. Multiple sources that say the same is a general consensus, even though you say your side is joking around, and my side is throwing rocks and being direspectful.

That pretty selective, and self serving. Why not just say its wrong to attack a first lady? On that we can agree.

I know the difference between a joke and an attack and I never said Laura Bush should be immune to criticism, she's a public figure. When a public figure's public behavior contradicts their public message they should be held accountable, and that's what I'm doing to these nags attacking Laura Bush.

Bush's behavior has been exemplary, her work on behalf of women is unquestionable. You choose not to hold these hypocrites accountable with me that's your choice, but it speaks volumes.

Hello again, Steve:

I think Laura Bush is great.. Am I going to blast everybody that doesn't agree with me?? No, of course not. I don't see YOU doing that.. To expect it of US, and not your own, is an indication that you drank the koolaid.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

I think Laura Bush is great.. Am I going to blast everybody that doesn't agree with me??? No, of course not. I don't see YOU doing that.. To expect it of US, and not your own, is an indication that you drank the koolaid.

excon

You have no idea how much stuff I let slide instead of trying to make an issue out of it, am I supposed to start a thread just to say this is a stupid attack? You made the charge of a GOP "war on women" and that's not who is waging a war on women. If you can't see the war on women waged by the left that is a clear indication you drank the koolaid.

and that's not who is waging a war on women. If you can't see the war on women waged by the left that is a clear indication you drank the koolaid.Hello again, Steve:

Let me see. You think any RANDOM attack on a Republican woman constitutes a war on women, particularly REPUBLICAN women...

Then you compare that to a CONCERTED effort by a huge segment of society to pass LAWS that negatively effect women, and you think it's the same thing.

Man, you DID drink the koolaid.

excon

To be more specific, the right wing gop war is with everybody that's not in lock step with them/you.

That's why you only recognize when YOU are being attacked. So your attack on Laura Bush can be seen as a joke too, or opinion, take your pick. Now if you don't think the joke on Mrs Bush was funny, then you know how I feel about the JOKES on Mrs Obama.

Maybe you don't want to admit YOU are as sensitive as I am!

To be more specific, the right wing gop war is with everybody that's not in lock step with them/you.

Oh come on Tal, your side hammers and hammers and hammers and every time we give ground on something you call us hypocrites - then demand more. That's bullsh*t.


That's why you only recognize when YOU are being attacked.

Really? Both sides attack, it's been that way since the earliest days of our republic. I speak for my side and you speak for yours, and if the attack is unfair then I'll be more than happy to join you. Media Matters totally took Malkin's comments (http://michellemalkin.com/2011/09/29/mrs-obamas-goes-incognito-lady-gaga-style/) out of context ( no surprise), she was commenting on the "cheesy stage-managing" of the White House and the compliant press.


So your attack on Laura Bush can be seen as a joke too, or opinion, take your pick.

"Leading the charge of “The 22,” as we shall call them, is Sonia Pressman Fuentes, co-founder of the National Organization for Women, who described her reaction upon reading that Bush was being honored as “a sudden onset of Alzheimer’s.”

Well, at least she didn’t say the vapors.

“I couldn’t believe my eyes,” she said. “It’s not partisan. I’m not complaining that she’s a Republican.” (Snowe, after all, is a Republican.) “I’m complaining that she’s never done anything for women (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/kathleen-parker-laura-bushs-fight-for-women/2012/06/19/gJQA8v70oV_story.html) to get this award.”

That's no joke. Does Mrs. Bush deserve that or has she earned the honor she's about to receive? Simple question, why won't anyone answer it?

That's no joke. Does Mrs. Bush deserve that or has she earned the honor she's about to receive? Simple question, why won't anyone answer it?


Ok, I'll answer it. From what I have read she sounds like a very worthy recipient.


Tut

Ok, I'll answer it. From what I have read she sounds like a very worthy recipient.


Tut

Indeed she is, thanks Tut.

Hello again,

Iowa Radio Host Says Nuns Should Be “Pistol Whipped”; (http://www.faithinpubliclife.org/blog/iowa-radio-host-says-nuns-should-be-pistol-whipped-gop-congressman-laughs/) GOP Congressman Laughs.

Nuns are women too.

excon

43 Catholic organizations that filed lawsuits against the Obama administration,and we are supposed to take the position of a handful of rogue nuns as a mass protest by Catholics against the Ryan Budget ?

No ,they shouldn't be pistol whipped . They should be ridiculed... perhaps as vigorously as the left mockingly satirized traditional Catholic nuns.

Btw ,the nuns on the bus are also protesting the doctrinal assessment of the LCWR by the Vatican... which basically gave them a smack down over their beliefs.

Carol Marin had a terrific column in today's Chicago Sun-Times:

Nuns under fire take to the road - Chicago Sun-Times (http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/13352657-452/nuns-under-fire-take-to-the-road.html)

I especially liked, "And so the bishops are on their own two-week road trip called a Fortnight of Freedom to argue that their religious liberty is under attack by the Obama administration.

The difference in tone between the nuns and bishops is striking. While the sisters are raising issues of people living on the margins, the bishops are protesting what they view as an assault on their authority."

And

"It helps to remember that Joan of Arc was declared a heretic and burned at the stake before the church declared her a saint. And in October, Pope Benedict XVI will canonize Sister Hildegard of Bingen, whom a bishop once ex-communicated."

Carol Marin had a terrific column in today's Chicago Sun-Times:

Nuns under fire take to the road - Chicago Sun-Times (http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/13352657-452/nuns-under-fire-take-to-the-road.html)

I especially liked, "And so the bishops are on their own two-week road trip called a Fortnight of Freedom to argue that their religious liberty is under attack by the Obama administration.

The difference in tone between the nuns and bishops is striking. While the sisters are raising issues of people living on the margins, the bishops are protesting what they view as an assault on their authority."

and

"It helps to remember that Joan of Arc was declared a heretic and burned at the stake before the church declared her a saint. And in October, Pope Benedict XVI will canonize Sister Hildegard of Bingen, whom a bishop once ex-communicated."

Good column, but unfair to compare the two issues. Each is legitimate in its own way.

Good column, but unfair to compare the two issues. Each is legitimate in its own way.Hello A:

Here's the difference.. There's no left wing group calling for the bishops to get roughed up.

excon

Technically Hildegard of Bingen had a sentence of interdict ;not excommunication . It is different from excommunication in that the person is not kicked out of the church . But the same restrictions on celebrating and receiving the sacraments apply as excommunication.

She appealed and eventually had the interdict removed .

I'm sure all of you thought Mickelson was being serious. An unfortunate choice of words but he was no doubt joking, unlike the misogynists on the left.

Hello again, Steve:

So, I could tell a JOKE about blowing John Bohener away, and that would be OK. Of course, if somebody DID it, I could always claim it wasn't my fault.. It was a JOKE.

excon

Funny how NK likes to pretend I'm the one who is oversensitive around here yet you guys get your panties in a wad over a guy who was obviously not being serious. When you get upset over the routine misogyny (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/04/rush-limbaugh-s-apology-liberal-men-need-to-follow-suit.html) from the left, we can talk.

Hello again, Steve:

So, I could tell a JOKE about blowing John Bohener away, and that would be OK. Of course, if somebody DID it, I could always claim it wasn't my fault.. It was a JOKE.

Excon

At least he didn't want to strap on some explosives and put the president and Mrs. Bush, the Cheneys "and anybody else that can fit" into his explosive "love hug (http://news.yahoo.com/maurice-sendak-said-killing-bush-wonderful-180556827--abc-news-politics.html)."


Maurice Sendak may have been even wilder than his "wild things."

In one of the children's book author's last interviews before he died of a stroke in May, Sendak said he thought about trying to assassinate former President George W. Bush and former Vice President Cheney.

"Bush was president, I thought, 'Be brave. Tie a bomb to your shirt. Insist on going to the White House. And I want to have a big hug with the vice president, definitely. And his wife, and the president, and his wife, and anybody else that can fit into the love hug,'" Sendak told The Comics Journal's founder Gary Groth in an interview that will be published in the magazine's next edition.

"And then we'll blow ourselves up, and I'd be a hero," Sendak continued.

"It would have been a very brave and wonderful thing," said Sendak, who wrote the whimsical "Where the Wild Things Are."

No wonder children are viciously taunting bus monitors.

The logic of the pro-choice crowd just defies logic. Notoriously pro-choice Mayor Bloomberg wants to lock up baby formula in NY hospitals.


Mayor Bloomberg pushing NYC hospitals to hide baby formula so more new moms will breast-feed (http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/mayor_knows_breast_WqU1iYRQvwbEkDuvn0vb1H#ixzz228j OuSAT)

The nanny state is going after moms.

Mayor Bloomberg is pushing hospitals to hide their baby formula behind locked doors so more new mothers will breast-feed.

Starting Sept. 3, the city will keep tabs on the number of bottles that participating hospitals stock and use — the most restrictive pro-breast-milk program in the nation.

Under the city Health Department’s voluntary Latch On NYC initiative, 27 of the city’s 40 hospitals have also agreed to give up swag bags sporting formula-company logos, toss out formula-branded tchotchkes like lanyards and mugs, and document a medical reason for every bottle that a newborn receives.

While breast-feeding activists applaud the move, bottle-feeding moms are bristling at the latest lactation lecture.

“If they put pressure on me, I would get annoyed,” said Lynn Sidnam, a Staten Island mother of two formula-fed girls, ages 4 months and 9 years. “It’s for me to choose.”

Sorry Lynn, choice is so yesterday.

In the same way that the Westboro Baptist Church does not represent all christians, this Bloomberg guy does not represent all pro-choice people.

The logic of the pro-choice crowd just defies logic. Notoriously pro-choice Mayor Bloomberg wants to lock up baby formula in NY hospitals.



Sorry Lynn, choice is so yesterday.

So you are a conservative TP that's favors choice? Or did I miss the joke?

Geeze ,you would think the mom was trying to feed the baby a Big Gulp !

In the same way that the Westboro Baptist Church does not represent all christians, this Bloomberg guy does not represent all pro-choice people.

Did I say he does? No I did not. But you're right in this case, the bulk of the "pro-choice crowd" (translation: abortion activists) is far less tolerant than Bloomberg.

Originally Posted by NeedKarma:
In the same way that the Westboro Baptist Church does not represent all christians, this Bloomberg guy does not represent all pro-choice people.


Did I say he does?

Yes you did when you said :

The logic of the pro-choice crowd just defies logic.

the bulk of the "pro-choice crowd" (translation: abortion activists)The "pro-life" crowd (mother killers) ain't so smart.

Wait, wasn't it just this morning you were whining about insults being tossed around? I knew you couldn't refrain from throwing bombs yourself, it's just who you are.

But mother killers and insulting their intelligence? Wow, you're really wading in the cesspool now. I'm sure your kids would be proud of you.

Satire, learn about it. :-)

Satire, learn about it. :-)

Ain't that ironic. Bwa ha ha!

geeze ,you would think the mom was trying to feed the baby a Big Gulp !

But not from a 40oz cup because those have been banned already :)

Hello again,

The NON existent war on women (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/republicans-vs-women.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120730)continues...


A new Republican spending proposal revives some of the more extreme attacks on women’s health and freedom that were blocked by the Senate earlier in this Congress. The resurrection is part of an alarming national crusade that goes beyond abortion rights and strikes broadly at women’s health in general.

Or, you can pretend it's not happening, and the moon is made of green cheese.

Excon

A NY Times editorial is not gospel.

A NY Times editorial is not gospel.Hello again, Steve;

Their OPINION may not be gospel, but their reporting is (http://appropriations.house.gov/uploadedfiles/bills-112hr-sc-ap-fy13-laborhhsed.pdf).

Now, you can PRETEND the right wing lawmakers AREN'T doing what they're doing, if you like. But, the REST of us live here on Earth..

excon

All this amounts to is you guys on the left just take issue with anyone having values other than your own, such as not wanting to use my tax dollars to kill babies and expecting people to be responsible for themselves whenever reasonably possible.

All this amounts to is you guys on the left just take issue with anyone having values other than your own,

OMG, we're like two peas in a pod, I said almost the same thing: https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/birth-control-pills-ii-688152.html#post3215551

We are nothing alike and the only thing similar in our posts is what I said both times.

We are nothing alike Thank you, that made my day. :D

Hello again,

Well, no wonder right wingers are against an exception for rape.. They think a woman's body "shut's down", and she can't get pregnant... Apparently, Congressman Todd Aikin (http://www.cinemablend.com/pop/Watch-Congressman-Todd-Akin-Claim-Legitimate-Rape-Doesn-t-Usually-Cause-Pregnancy-45881.html), of Mo. Believes there's really no sensible reason for abortions to ever take place, except if the shutdown functions fail, then she should tough it out.

What is Steve fond of saying?? You can't make this stuff up.

excon

Definitely an uninformed statement.
So tell me ;does the President still believe in infanticide when a baby has survived the abortion procedure ?

So tell me ;does the President still believe in infanticide when a baby has survived the abortion procedure ?No.

Do you still beat your wife?

There is legislation in Illinois that backs up my claim about the President .

No

So when did he change his mind?

Links to Barack Obama’s votes on Illinois’ Born Alive Infant Protection Act (http://www.jillstanek.com/2008/02/links-to-barack-obamas-votes-on-illinois-born-alive-infant-protection-act/)

Maybe you should read what he actually said as opposed to what your right-wing blogs say that you think: http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf

Maybe you should read what he actually said as opposed to what your right-wing blogs sayHello again, NK:

If anything is abundantly clear here, it's that Republicans DON'T want to hear what someone ACTUALLY said...

excon

Hello again, NK:

If anything is abundantly clear here, it's that Republicans DON'T want to hear what someone ACTUALLY said...

excon

I distinctly heard Obama say " If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen." Context or not that was a stupid and insulting line. Deal with it.

I distinctly heard Joe Biden say "they gon' put y'all back in chains!" That was stupid, insulting, condescending, racist thing to say. Indefensible, too.

If anything is abundantly clear here, it's that Republicans DON'T want to hear what someone ACTUALLY said...Hello again,

What is ALSO abundantly clear here, is that right wingers have NO idea how a woman's body works. I'll bet they were home schooled.

Republicans should be PREVENTED from EVER legislating issues on women's health.. Because when they do, they get it WRONG!

excon

Maybe you should read what he actually said as opposed to what your right-wing blogs say that you think: http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf

I did read what he said, changes nothing. He refused to support legislation that would provide care to a child that survived a live birth abortion. These babies were being left to die, sometimes just taken to a soiled utility room and left there. Has he changed his mind?

P.S. That site isn't just some "right-wing blog," Jill Stanek was a nurse in labor and delivery at the hospital where this was happening and testified along with the Illinois AG's office in support of the bill.

They get it wrong on many things as Ryan was for stimulis until he was against it, and he took the money while he was preaching how it didn't work.

Well it worked for him!! And the rest of the repubs who took the money. This is but another example of why repubs should NOT be making decision about the well being of others, let alone the direction of a nation.

Hello again,

What is ALSO abundantly clear here, is that right wingers have NO idea how a woman's body works. I'll bet they were home schooled.

Republicans should be PREVENTED from EVER legislating issues on women's health.. Because when they do, they get it WRONG!!

excon

That's bullsh*t and you know it. And unlike you when one of our clowns says something ridiculous we'll call it what it is. You won't find many if any on our side defending his stupidity unlike the whole of the Democratic troops rushing out to deny Biden's racist remarks.

I did read what he said, changes nothing. He refused to support legislation that would provide care to a child that survived a live birth abortion.Did you happen to understand why he voted "present" for that particular bill? I don't think you do. You'd rather yell out "infanticide!" and appeal to emotion instead of discussing facts.
These babies were being left to die, sometimes just taken to a soiled utility room and left there.This is another appeal to emotion instead of facts. This is an obvious fabrication.

This is another appeal to emotion instead of facts. This is an obvious fabrication.
I especially noted "soiled."

They get it wrong on many things as Ryan was for stimulis until he was against it, and he took the money while he was preaching how it didn't work.

Well it worked for him!!!! And the rest of the the repubs who took the money. This is but another example of why repubs should NOT be making decision about the well being of others, let alone the direction of a nation.

We've already acknowledged Ryan's previous support so what's your point?

We've already acknowledged Ryan's previous support so what's your point?
That they are hypocrites who only look out for themselves.

Did you happen to understand why he voted "present" for that particular bill? I don't think you do. You'd rather yell out "infanticide!" and appeal to emotion instead of discussing facts. This is another appeal to emotion instead of facts. This is an obvious fabrication.

You really ought to know the facts before claiming "obvious fabrication."

From my link (apology accepted):

I especially noted "soiled."

Because it was in the testimony. Duh.

You really ought to know the facts before claiming "obvious fabrication."
So that is the standard procedure? Any more cases like that?

If not was the doctor/hospital prosecuted?

Seems like a single isolated case that you are using to make people believe is normal practice.

You obviously did not read it.

<sigh>

<sigh>

Well sir, your first two questions were OBVIOUSLY answered in the testimony rendering your conclusion baseless. Like I said, you might want to brush up on the facts before speaking next time. Just trying to help you keep from looking like a fool, but if you enjoy that have at it.

So that's the documented procedure? Can you link to that instead of an anti-abortionist's factless testimony?

Factless testimony? Are you saying this nurse lied to her state legislature?

That never happens??

Both sides have called out Aikin... Romney before Obama. Just love the select feigned moral outrage of the Left over 'rape '. They never showed such outrage when Clintoon raped Juanita Broaddrick ;or groped and sexually assaulted Kathleen Willey . Aikin will be forced to drop out of the race over what he said. Clintoon survived what he did .

Glad to see you support "illegitimate" rape whatever that is.

I expect you could say this is part of the war on women
'Offensive and indefensible': candidate may step down after 'legitimate rape' claims (http://www.smh.com.au/world/offensive-and-indefensible-candidate-may-step-down-after-legitimate-rape-claims-20120821-24j3d.html)

Glad to see you support "illegitimate" rape whatever that is. Nothing I wrote leads to that conclusion.

That never happens???

That's a non-answer.

That's a non-answer.This place is full of non-answers, you could spend your day making that comment. LOL!

Hah:

Republicans Condemn Akin's Comments As Blemish On Party's Otherwise Spotless Women's Rights Record | The Onion - America's Finest News Source (http://www.theonion.com/articles/republicans-condemn-akins-comments-as-blemish-on-p,29259/)

Both sides have called out Aikin ...Romney before Obama. Just love the select feigned moral outrage of the Left over 'rape '. Hello again, tom:

I don't know about the "left's" feigned outrage... At least they didn't put anything in the Democratic PLATFORM about it...

You guys, however, are feigning outage over what Aikin SAID, but your REPUBLICAN PLATFORM supports the SAME POLICY Aikin (and RYAN) supports. That is NO abortion exception for rape or incest...

Until yesterday, that is. BOTH Romney and Ryan came out and flip flopped.. Has their position tied them up in knots?? Will their flip flop COST the support of the Tea Party??

excon

Hello, again:

Yes, I have more to say..

I just wish I had known about this anti-baby juice women could squirt. By the way. Why didn't Rush Limprod suggest that Sandra Fluke use her squirter, instead of leeching on the taxpayer... Squirters are free, aren't they?

excon

This place is full of non-answers, you could spend your day making that comment. LOL!

I asked you if you thought she lied, not if it ever happens.

Hello, again:

Yes, I have more to say..

I just wish I had known about this anti-baby juice women could squirt. By the way. Why didn't Rush Limprod suggest that Sandra Fluke use her squirter, instead of leeching on the taxpayer... Squirters are free, aren't they?

excon

We've pretty much all roundly condemned his stupidity and asked him to step aside. You guys are stuck with Biden, the gaffe-tastic gift that keeps on giving.

They celebrate Clintoon ; a serial abuser of women.

They celebrate Clintoon ; a serial abuser of women.

Who is "they"?

Oh ;perhaps 'they' are the same people who ask me to defend 'my side' or 'you guys'. .

oh ;perhaps 'they' are the same people who ask me to defend 'my side' or 'you guys'. .

Ok, so where are they celebrating Clinton's alleged abuse of women?

Ok, so where are they celebrating Clinton's alleged abuse of women? There is nothing 'alleged ' .He's a serial abuser . Here is where they are honoring him.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/clinton-receive-star-speaking-role-democratic-convention-cheney/story?id=16886774


Contrast that with
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/20/gop-chair-akin-should-drop-out-skip-convention/

We've pretty much all roundly condemned his stupidity and asked him to step aside. You guys are stuck with Biden,Hello again, Steve:

We?? As in the small minority of the party YOU control?? Or is it the Tea Party we, who's backing him up 100%??

It looks like you're STUCK with Akin too, and I couldn't be more thrilled.

excon

Hello again, Steve:

We??? As in the small minority of the party YOU control??? Or is it the Tea Party we, who's backing him up 100%???

You don't keep up with the news much do you?

RNC Chair to Akin: ‘Step Aside’ (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/20/RNC-Chair-Akin-Step-Down)

Tea Party Express calls on Akin to step down (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/20/tea-party-express-calls-on-akin-to-step-down/)

Tea Party's Kremer: Akin should 'step aside' (http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2012/08/tea-partys-kremer-akin-should-step-aside.html)

Well lets see... technically it was the Dem cross over vote that selected Akin in the 1st place. McCaskill ran unopposed for the Dems in Missouri ;an open primary state . The Republics had their vote split between 3 major and other minor candidates .
McCaskill made it clear she preferred running against Akin ;and the Dem crossover vote made that happen.
And the real Tea party candidate in the race was Sarah Steelman.
Leaders All Across Missouri and America are Supporting Sarah Steelman for U.S. Senate! | Sarah Steelman (http://www.sarahsteelman.com/news-center/endorsements)

You don't keep up with the news much do you?Hello again, Steve:

Is it ME, or you?

Huckabee to Akin - STAY IN..

Pat Robertson to Akin - STAY IN...

Family Research Council to Akin - STAY IN..

Tea Party to Akin - STAY IN..

Akin to the world - I'M STAYING IN!

Look... The GOP didn't support his candidacy so, he has NO allegiance to them... The Tea Party reigns...

excon

There is nothing 'alleged ' .He's a serial abuser . Here is where they are honoring him.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/clinton-receive-star-speaking-role-democratic-convention-cheney/story?id=16886774


contrast that with
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/20/gop-chair-akin-should-drop-out-skip-convention/


Only a righty would compare the only president to ever balance a budget in history with a loony tune whose only claim to fame is redefining rape, based on allegations and innuendo.

Clinton survived his battles, and prospered,will Akin? Sure he will because he just said what the right believes, but he said it in public. That was his only mistake. As we speak repubs are considering putting no exceptions for abortion as part of their convention platform.

TRENDING: GOP platform committee approves tough anti-abortion stance – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/21/gop-platform-committee-approves-tough-anti-abortion-stance/)

Hello again, Steve:

Is it ME, or you?

Huckabee to Akin - STAY IN..

Pat Robertson to Akin - STAY IN...

Family Research Council to Akin - STAY IN..

Tea Party to Akin - STAY IN..

Akin to the world - I'M STAYING IN!!

Look... The GOP didn't support his candidacy so, he has NO allegiance to them... The Tea Party reigns...

excon

So those Tea Party people in the videos in the links I gave you are only pretending they want Akin to go away? Dude, you been smokin' way too much today.

Some want him out, some want him in. Nobody has the power to make him leave, and he said he ain't going. So wants got nothing to do with it, but its fun watching you guys run around.

Better than the Kardasians any way.

Some want him out, some want him in. Nobody has the power to make him leave, and he said he ain't going. So wants got nothing to do with it, but its fun watching you guys run around.

Better than the Kardasians any way.

No sir it's a distinct difference between left and right, we police our own and hold them accountable while your side celebrates their perverts, racists, weirdos and crooks.

Clinton survived his battles, and prospered,will Akin?
The compliant press did not press him about his serial abuse... Back then it was "just sex". He sexually assaulted at least 3 women (not including the ones the Arkansas State troopers covered up) /

Sure he will because he just said what the right believes, but he said it in public. That was his only mistake. As we speak repubs are considering putting no exceptions for abortion as part of their convention platform.
Whether that becomes the platform or not ,his ignorant words do not represent the views of the "right" .
Again ;he spoke with an incredible ignorance. Clintoon acted with gross malice and disregard to the women he assaulted . But "your side " has given him a pass for 2 decades .

But we don't vote for them. When they get out of hand we ignore them and call the real police when they cross the line between loony, and criminal.

At least we KNOW the difference. And taking away his allowance ain't policing your own. Seems your efforts to police your own have fallen on deaf ears because he said screw you, he ain't going any place.

There is nothing 'alleged ' .He's a serial abuser . Here is where they are honoring him.

Clinton to receive star speaking role at Democratic convention; Cheney to skip Republican gathering - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/clinton-receive-star-speaking-role-democratic-convention-cheney/story?id=16886774)


contrast that with
GOP chair: Akin should drop out, skip convention – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/08/20/gop-chair-akin-should-drop-out-skip-convention/)
They are honoring his political contributions, not his personal life.

Akin wants to make his views a political issue.

Very big difference. Can you see that?

Maybe Bill Cosby should have a new show called "Republicans say the darndest things." They already have about 10 seasons worth of material.

Perhaps we could have a new sitcom called the Right Wing starring George W Bush as the dullard President, oh wait aminute its been done already

Seems your efforts to police your own have fallen on deaf ears because he said screw you, he ain't going any place.
Yes the schmuck is doing a Charlie Rangel and playing hardball. Too bad because my only real concern on this issue is that he weakens the chance of changing the majority in the Senate.

The Repubics have to realize that there are consequences for what they say that the Dems don't have to concern themselves with... in fact ;the Dems hardly ever have to pay consequences for their deeds. The deadline came and went . That doesn't mean he can't be convinced to step down . But it makes the process more difficult.

That doesn't mean he can't be convinced to step down . But it makes the process more difficult.Hello again, tom:

He's NOT stepping down.. A senate seat you COULD have won will now stay with the Democrats... That means CONTROL of the Senate is once again, slipping from your grasp.

Now, VP Paul Ryan, if there ever IS such an abomination, WON'T be able to break the tie in the Senate...

Poor fellows... The Tea Party strikes again.. I'da thought you'da learned from Sharron Angle and Christine O'Donnell - Joe Buck and that guy in Alaska.. No, huh?

excon

Hello again, tom:

So, since your party platform includes the NO abortion in case of rape plank, I want to ask you a question...

After a women suffers the indignity of being raped, are you going to to make her suffer the indignity of having to bear the rapists child by ORDER of the government?

Then after you answer, tell me again about how you're for SMALL government...

excon

You didn't read my reply earlier . The Tea Party Express and Palin did not support Aikin Sarah Steelman was the Tea Party candidate . What we've learned is that some can call themselves Tea Party candidates ,and get on the ballot under an assumed Tea Party line ;and not be a real Tea Party candidate.

We had the same problem here in NY in the special election for District 26 when a phoney named Jack Davis undermined and split the ticket ,handing an unexpected win to Democrat Kathy Hochul.
Her win was the first time the district had gone to a Democrat in nearly 40 years. Now she is running for reelection and is tacking hard right because she knows she has no chance to win as a Pelosi -lib.

Yeah ;the Repubics may squander a chance at the majority with this... But ,the real issue is open primaries. Why either party permits them is beyond me.

It's a very clever trap your side poses. If we take a moral position opposing abortions ;and we have exceptions ;then it weakens the moral reason . Then you can go further and say that if a baby doesn't deserve the protection of it's life because it was conceived in rape ;then you can push the envelope and question what other lines in the sand exceptions can be breached . Maybe some genetic deficiency in the child ? Maybe the child isn't the gender you prefer ?
So I say without reservation that the only exception I think is legitimate is if there is a choice between the life of the mother or the child.

How does that make me big government ? It doesn't . My contention has always been that it was up to the States to decide the issue .

Now ;are there any restrictions you would put on abortions?. late term ? Murder immediately prior to delivery ? And if so ;why don't those restrictions violate the women's right to control her body ?