The GOP and women's rights.

[taichiliberal]

Walker making it more difficult for women to sue to get equal pay for equal work and now Arizonia is reportedly considering legislation that would make it legal for doctors to lie to their women patients in order to prevent an abortion ...

I'm against abortion (in favor of equal pay for equal work) and even I can see that Romney ids going to have to distance himself from this stuff to crack into Obama's lead among women.

Romney has the support of a lot of women. He will need more.

What is more important is that the GOP get away from these issues (which don't impact a lot of women personally) and get back to the basics of the economy (which impact a lot more of them).

You can't have GOP governors and legislators pushing anti-women's rights stuff and then have the Presidential candidate try to ignore it. That's just dumb.

YOU and your cohorts don't dare address the facts of the OP, and are making yourselves look like misogynist cretins none-the-less. This is NOT going to sit well with women regardless of their political affiliations. Deal with it.

 

[taichiliberal]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

Ahhhhh, Media Matters for America. The World Net Daily of the left. Dismissed.

Ahhh, an intellectually dishonest and cowardly buffoon trying to appear smart and smug.

I can READ both and discuss the content....YOU obviously cannot or will not.

YOU are indeed dismissed.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

100% bull shit.

Name one right that the GOP is taking from women.

I'll give you the Top 10. And before you brainlessly dismiss this list simply because of the source, why don't you use your brain and try to refute some of these points?

Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP's War on Women

1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't yet. Shocker.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims."

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids' preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.

10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can't make this stuff up).


Stop the War on Women: WHAT'S AT STAKE

I like how you start your post by demanding that someone else "use his brain", and then the entire rest of your post is SOMEONE ELSE'S OPINION.

Way to think for yourself, flatliner. Now let's see you source a single one of these nonsensical "points", and I DON'T mean from someone's opinion column telling you it happened. I mean the actual SOURCE.

Impress me with your credentials for denigrating anyone else's thinking capacity, dipshit.

 

[taichiliberal]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

Ahhhhh, Media Matters for America. The World Net Daily of the left. Dismissed.

Well if lie often, and they do. It will become the truth.

They should have had Dan Rather write the hit piece.

Translation: another neocon/teabagger dummy on Full-auto and shooting blanks.

Cowards don't DARE discuss content, then just throw rocks at headlines and banners.

 

[taichiliberal]

Nobody, but NOBODY should be in charge of reproductive rights other than each individual and their government issued prophylactics

There fixed

WTF are you babbling about? How in the world is CHOICE a problem for you neocon/teabagger idiots, since you're always wailing about non-gov't interference in your lives?

The Media Matter links documents how the right wing agenda is dead set on using the gov't to FORCE women to do the bidding of the religious right wing. So much for the Constitution.

 

[Peach]

The rights of George Zimmerman && Ted Nugent mean more to the far right than any rights of females.

 

[taichiliberal]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

100% bull shit.

Name one right that the GOP is taking from women.

From the OP link:

In May 2011, House GOP Passed Bill That Would Ban D.C. Reproductive Funding. In May 2011, House Republicans unanimously passed the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, which created a "ban on the District [of Columbia] using its own money to fund abortions for low-income women." From The Washington Post:

The House approved a bill Wednesday that would make permanent a ban on the District using its own money to fund abortions for low-income women, dealing D.C. another setback in its quest to retain control over its finances.

The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act cleared the House on a 251-175 vote, with 16 Democrats joining all 235 Republicans present to support it. The bill would tighten laws designed to prevent federally-funded abortions across the country, and would enshrine the District ban into federal law. The spending resolution signed by President Obama last month contains a similar restriction on D.C., but it only lasts through Sept. 30. [The Washington Post, 5/4/11]

"No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion" Bill Originally Included Language Restricting The Definition Of Rape. The original version of the No Taxpayer For Abortion Act included language amended from the Hyde Amendment, which limited federal funding for abortion to cases of rape, incest, and when the mother's life is in danger. The law would have removed all exceptions other than "forcible" rape. A January 28, 2011, Mother Jones article pointed out that this would have "rule[d] out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases." From Mother Jones:

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act," a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

With this legislation, which was introduced last week by Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), Republicans propose that the rape exemption be limited to "forcible rape." This would rule out federal assistance for abortions in many rape cases, including instances of statutory rape, many of which are non-forcible. For example: If a 13-year-old girl is impregnated by a 24-year-old adult, she would no longer qualify to have Medicaid pay for an abortion. (Smith's spokesman did not respond to a call and an email requesting comment.) [Mother Jones, 1/28/11]

Arizona GOP Promoting Law That Restricts Abortion To 20 Weeks And Requires Ultrasound. The Republican-led state legislature in Arizona is promoting a bill that would ban "most abortions performed after 20 weeks of pregnancy." From Reuters:

A controversial Arizona bill that bans most abortions performed after 20 weeks of pregnancy moved closer to becoming law on Wednesday in the Republican-controlled state legislature after clearing the state Senate.

The bill, which would still allow abortions after 20 weeks in the case of medical emergency, was passed by a mostly party-line 20-to-10 vote in the Senate on Tuesday. Only a small number of abortions are performed in Arizona after 20 weeks.

[...]

The Arizona bill would also require women to have an ultrasound at least 24 hours prior to having an abortion, instead of the one hour that is currently mandated under state law.

In addition, the bill would require that the state create a website that details the risks of the procedure and shows pictures of the fetus in various stages. [Reuters, 3/28/12]

Pennsylvania GOP Proposed "Invasive" Ultrasound Bill. In February, Republicans in the Pennsylvania State House introduced legislation requiring that "medical professionals say women would have to undergo an invasive, vaginal ultrasound." From PennLive.com:

Under the bill in Pennsylvania, medical professionals say women would have to undergo an invasive, vaginal ultrasound. That prospect is drawing outrage among supporters of abortion rights.


[...]

The bill, proposed by Rep. Kathy Rapp, a conservative Republican from Warren County, outlines what women seeking an abortion would undergo in great detail.

The bill requires that the woman not only get an ultrasound, but that the ultrasound screen be in her line of sight. The woman can choose to look away, the legislation states, but the technician performing the ultrasound would have to note if the woman viewed the results.

The patient would also have to hear the results of the physician's finding, sign a written report to give to the abortion provider, and receive a sealed copy of the ultrasound's image.

 

[taichiliberal]

Article [XIX].

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Ratification was completed on August 18, 1920.

Woman voters matter ... at least since 1920 and only after the same Rs who opposed women's rights then as now that tried to prevent it.

Oh, really? "The same R's", is it? Please tell me which Republican in EITHER house of Congress has been there since 1920, much less "opposed women's rights" the whole time.

If you can't say something intelligent, don't talk.

Initially, the GOP was a power behind the Women's Suffrage Movement.

But as times change, they are now the opposite of that.

 

[taichiliberal]

I have and continued to discuss the CONTENT of any post put forth by anyone on these threads in the last 2 years.

You and your compadres have neither the guts, brains or honesty to do the same, as you demonstrate with each dodge and smokescreen you put forth here.

Grow a pair, my Odd little man, and discuss the CONTENT of my links, using facts and logic to prove me/it wrong. IF what you assert is true, then what I request should be a snap. I'll wait.

There's a way around that. Usually such sites will link to the original article, which most would find more palatable.

Or you dipshit leftists could stop wasting everyone's time with your threads based on someone's Internet opinion column. We don't care about YOUR opinions, and we're talking to you. Why would we give a fuck about the opinion of someone who's not even on the board?

Stop braying, Cecilie....the Media Matter link DOCUMENTS the source of it's information. Had you or your equally silly cohorts actually READ the content, you'd know that.

It's one thing to have an opinion, another to substantiate it with valid, documented FACTS. I've done so....have you?

 

[taichiliberal]

Walker making it more difficult for women to sue to get equal pay for equal work and now Arizonia is reportedly considering legislation that would make it legal for doctors to lie to their women patients in order to prevent an abortion ...

I'm against abortion (in favor of equal pay for equal work) and even I can see that Romney ids going to have to distance himself from this stuff to crack into Obama's lead among women.

Romney has the support of a lot of women. He will need more.

What is more important is that the GOP get away from these issues (which don't impact a lot of women personally) and get back to the basics of the economy (which impact a lot more of them).

Which is exactly why THE LEFT keeps bringing this shit up, and then babbling about how they're "GOP issues". If they're our issues, why aren't we the ones introducing them into the debate?

The "left" is pointing out actions being done by the neocon/teabagger driven GOP and "red state" governors and politicos. TFB that when the light of day is shone, your right wing tin gods don't look so good.

Why don't you stop being a willfully ignorant neocon parrot and READ the information contained. THEN you can discuss the information rationally and logically.

Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

 

[taichiliberal]

100% bull shit.

Name one right that the GOP is taking from women.

I'll give you the Top 10. And before you brainlessly dismiss this list simply because of the source, why don't you use your brain and try to refute some of these points?

Top 10 Shocking Attacks from the GOP's War on Women

1) Republicans not only want to reduce women's access to abortion care, they're actually trying to redefine rape. After a major backlash, they promised to stop. But they haven't yet. Shocker.

2) A state legislator in Georgia wants to change the legal term for victims of rape, stalking, and domestic violence to "accuser." But victims of other less gendered crimes, like burglary, would remain "victims."

3) In South Dakota, Republicans proposed a bill that could make it legal to murder a doctor who provides abortion care. (Yep, for real.)

4) Republicans want to cut nearly a billion dollars of food and other aid to low-income pregnant women, mothers, babies, and kids.

5) In Congress, Republicans have a bill that would let hospitals allow a woman to die rather than perform an abortion necessary to save her life.

6) Maryland Republicans ended all county money for a low-income kids' preschool program. Why? No need, they said. Women should really be home with the kids, not out working.

7) And at the federal level, Republicans want to cut that same program, Head Start, by $1 billion. That means over 200,000 kids could lose their spots in preschool.

8) Two-thirds of the elderly poor are women, and Republicans are taking aim at them too. A spending bill would cut funding for employment services, meals, and housing for senior citizens.

9) Congress just voted for a Republican amendment to cut all federal funding from Planned Parenthood health centers, one of the most trusted providers of basic health care and family planning in our country.

10) And if that wasn't enough, Republicans are pushing to eliminate all funds for the only federal family planning program. (For humans. But Republican Dan Burton has a bill to provide contraception for wild horses. You can't make this stuff up).


Stop the War on Women: WHAT'S AT STAKE

I like how you start your post by demanding that someone else "use his brain", and then the entire rest of your post is SOMEONE ELSE'S OPINION.

Way to think for yourself, flatliner. Now let's see you source a single one of these nonsensical "points", and I DON'T mean from someone's opinion column telling you it happened. I mean the actual SOURCE.

Impress me with your credentials for denigrating anyone else's thinking capacity, dipshit.

Why don't YOU get your head out of Limbaugh's ass and DO THE HONEST RESEARCH that is easily accessible to either prove or disprove what is being stated?

I provided DOCUMENTED evidence, but willfully ignorant neocon parrots like YOU REFUSE to read the information.

STFU and practice what you preach, Cecilie

 

[snakedoc]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

Your source say's all that needs to be said on this topic nothing to see here.

 

[taichiliberal]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

Your source say's all that needs to be said on this topic nothing to see here.

Maybe for those who have been actually reading their newspapers and other sources of information for the last few years, but for our willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest neocon/teabagger parrots on this thread, I provided a link to documented information.

 

[snakedoc]

Are the Republicans/conservatives conducting a legislative "war on women"? You Bet'cha!


Republican "War On Women" Is Not A Left-Wing Invention | Media Matters for America

Your source say's all that needs to be said on this topic nothing to see here.

Maybe for those who have been actually reading their newspapers and other sources of information for the last few years, but for our willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest neocon/teabagger parrots on this thread, I provided a link to documented information.

No you provide a link to a far left website with a political agenda that has no interest in facts truth or honesty that only a far left partisan would consider a legitimate source of information. I give it the same credibility I would any far right web site the fact that it supports your preconceived beliefs does not make it true. You have a nice night.

 

[BDBoop]

Okay, how about this.

Fetal Homicide State Laws

 

[taichiliberal]

Your source say's all that needs to be said on this topic nothing to see here.

Maybe for those who have been actually reading their newspapers and other sources of information for the last few years, but for our willfully ignorant and intellectually dishonest neocon/teabagger parrots on this thread, I provided a link to documented information.

No you provide a link to a far left website with a political agenda that has no interest in facts truth or honesty that only a far left partisan would consider a legitimate source of information. I give it the same credibility I would any far right web site the fact that it supports your preconceived beliefs does not make it true. You have a nice night.

Unlike you, I read EVERYTHING that is provided to me regardless of the source....that way I can honestly say that my conclusions are based on FACTS and NOT just the one sided views of a particular group.

As with anything, the internet provides numerous sources, and people have preferences.....I chose Media Matters because of it's history of accurately providing FACTS that can be corroborated, and thus accurately refuting and disproving the assertions and allegations of the right wing media. Had YOU actually READ the source material, you would have noted that the WASHINGTON POST was among the sources that validate the link....hardly "left wing".

Next time you want to condescend to someone, bunky....know WTF you're talking about....makes you look less foolish. Nitey-nite.

 

[Chris]

In 2011 over 600 anti choice bills were introduced at the state level by Republicans.

From the Center for Reproductive Rights' 2010-11 annual report:

"The Center is hard-pressed to cite a time in the last twenty years that can rival -- in volume and in severity -- this most recent period of anti-woman, anti-child, and anti-health legislative action in the United States."

http://mediamatters.org/research/201204100007

 

[Cecilie1200]

The rights of George Zimmerman && Ted Nugent mean more to the far right than any rights of females.

At least the rights of Zimmerman and Nugent that we're defending actually appear in the Constitution, unlike these apocryphals "rights of women" that you keep demanding in the name of women who never elected you their spokesperson. If you want to defend MY rights, try reading the Constitution to find them first.

Here's a tip, sweetie: just because we both have vaginas doesn't mean I agree with you, respect you, or want anyone thinking the stupid shit that emanates from your blowhole represents me. Speak for yourself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Okay, how about this.

Fetal Homicide State Laws

I do so love how liberal "women" - and eunuchs they call their "men" - view fetuses as the enemies of women. Yeah, I'm just dying to have these asshats as the "champions" of my rights.

 

[BDBoop]

That rather made no sense, "Cecilie".