The Republican War On Women

[IndependntLogic]

Just because I'm not some mindless whackjob who has the RW talking points form every single opinion for me, deosn't mean I'm not an Independent.

It was always my understanding that an independent tended to be less idealogical.

Actually, it means that we have our OWN ideals. My views are very strong. They just don't all agree with what Glenn Beck or Rush would like - unlike say, bripat. Many of my views are very Conservative. Virtually all of my iews on sicial issues are Liberal or at least Left Leaning - with the exception that I would like to see Christians afforded the same right to being open about who they are, as gay are.

let me give a clue to the clueless: Someone who agrees with Conservatives all the time isn't an Independent, they're a Conservative. Duh.

Conservative seems to escape defintion. Not all conservatives agree.

If the defintion of a conservative includes he word "mindless", then it came from a liberal.



Good Choice.

Ronald was very pragmatic while at the same time being very idealogical at a very basic level.

Reagan was a leader. He made a few serious mistakes but I like serving under him.

Bush41 was not my favorite. He was missing something.

He was the head of the CIA. I recognized the long-ingrained misdirection training when I saw him speak. It threw an unconscious curve that no one expected.

Bush43 was scary from the start...Gore and Kerry were worse. What can I say ?

Then the whackjobs toold over the party. You know, weaklings who come into a post and never have verifiable facts or even points to make. Just little sucklings who post about other people because they can't handle issues.

I will agree the GOP is a mess.

The main problem is that the very thing that it purports and used to attract people (decentralization) seems to be the one thing that keeps if from organizing in a way that would put the demos out of business for good.

I am not sure what you mean about the rest.

This thread is called the GOP "war" on women. There is no disputing the piecemeal activities that were listed in the OP. However, whether or not that constitutes a concerted "war" on women by the GOP is in serious doubt.

All of the laws regarding abortion or about "health care access" revolve around a topic that has been in dispute since Harry Blackmum defiled his robes in 1972.

Walkers stupidity is a single case and the

The GOP has blundered over and over with women. Transvaginal ultra-sounds, requiring them to look at pix prior to abortions, contraception, repealing Equal Pay etc... It's a matter of perception and they've blown it with the biggest voting bloc in America.

Oh and My signature? Oh yeah. Predicitng the GOP holds the house and takes the Senate is definitely a sign of a Democrat!

Well, predicting anything is pretty meaningless...as much as I'd like Mitt to win....I realize there WILL be an election in November.

Well perhaps but if I'm right in every single prediction, that will prove how supremely awesome I am!

I like your reason and civility, btw.

 

[kaz]

I'm still waiting for those bills that democrats passed regarding contraception, abortion, and rape by ultrasound

When you can answer this question. When I said you're wrong that all issues affect women, not just ones relating to your vagina, you came back with only issues that affect your vagina as your reply. So the question is, how, logically does your supporting my point refute it?
.

And if it's no big deal, then WHY on God's green is it all that the rethugs do these days. Why. You can keep on attacking me, but it won't make the shit they're pulling any less obvious.

Well, since we're about to depart from your vagina I know you're immediately going to lose interest, but I'll answer it anyway. You're remarkably unobservant. There are social conservatives (who are obsessed with your vagina like you are) and fiscal conservatives (who tend to not think your vagina is a matter for government).

The social conservatives introduce the idiotic bills. You have to keep saying introduce because they don't pass because Democrats and fiscal conservatives aren't interested in them. You ignore that and label the fiscal conservatives with the social conservative label. I know your head hit the desk in boredom when I stopped talking about your vagina and you're not reading this anymore, but it's what it is. You can't address reality because it doesn't work for liberalism, so you just go around screaming about your vagina and that it's why people need to vote for Democrats.

 

[kaz]

You could just look up the bill, the number is included.

That's funny from the sweetie who was too lazy to Google "Buffet 2 billion taxes owed" and posted someone should do it for her. I agree with you on this, people should look up basic facts they are unaware of on their own and only ask for supporting links for controversial or obscure facts. Remember this though next time you can't open a new tab and Google a simple answer to one of your questions.

 

[BDBoop]

I read the entire post - usually I stop when people insult my intelligence, but I kept going. So thank you for the explain.

By the way? It's not about 'my vagina' or anybody else's. It's about the FACT that it's ridiculous all this crap with transvaginal ultrasounds, scheduled 72-hour holds (so the doctor can be back out of State before the woman can be seen), employers having the right to ask WHY you're on the pill, life occurring two weeks before conception, "close your eyes if you don't want to see it", being forced to carry a dead baby to term because "cows and pigs do it" - that's not about vaginas. That's about power and control, and not a damn thing more.

 

[kaz]

I read the entire post - usually I stop when people insult my intelligence, but I kept going. So thank you for the explain.

By the way? It's not about 'my vagina' or anybody else's. It's about the FACT that it's ridiculous all this crap with transvaginal ultrasounds, scheduled 72-hour holds (so the doctor can be back out of State before the woman can be seen), employers having the right to ask WHY you're on the pill, life occurring two weeks before conception, "close your eyes if you don't want to see it", being forced to carry a dead baby to term because "cows and pigs do it" - that's not about vaginas. That's about power and control, and not a damn thing more.

If your earlier posts on the matter were like this I would not have insulted your intelligence. Again, I agree social conservatives are idiots who should take personal responsibility for their morality rather than run to government to use guns to do it for them. They are remarkably like liberals, they just want different things. But you're still brushing off the points I've made.

Women are affected by all issues, not just ones related to their vaginas and that's still all you're discussing. You can call it power and control, and I agree, just like it's power and control why liberals want government to use guns to force their agenda on us, but those are still the only issues you're discussing regarding women. All issues affect women, women are people. I actually see little of that from women on the Right, they think all issues affect them and don't just discuss the ones involving sex.

All Republicans are not social conservatives yet you label them as if they are.

 

[BDBoop]

I read the entire post - usually I stop when people insult my intelligence, but I kept going. So thank you for the explain.

By the way? It's not about 'my vagina' or anybody else's. It's about the FACT that it's ridiculous all this crap with transvaginal ultrasounds, scheduled 72-hour holds (so the doctor can be back out of State before the woman can be seen), employers having the right to ask WHY you're on the pill, life occurring two weeks before conception, "close your eyes if you don't want to see it", being forced to carry a dead baby to term because "cows and pigs do it" - that's not about vaginas. That's about power and control, and not a damn thing more.

If your earlier posts on the matter were like this I would not have insulted your intelligence. Again, I agree social conservatives are idiots who should take personal responsibility for their morality rather than run to government to use guns to do it for them. They are remarkably like liberals, they just want different things. But you're still brushing off the points I've made.

Women are affected by all issues, not just ones related to their vaginas and that's still all you're discussing. You can call it power and control, and I agree, just like it's power and control why liberals want government to use guns to force their agenda on us, but those are still the only issues you're discussing regarding women. All issues affect women, women are people. I actually see little of that from women on the Right, they think all issues affect them and don't just discuss the ones involving sex.

All Republicans are not social conservatives yet you label them as if they are.

I speak from my fear. The rest of it matters - of course it matters. I am a woman who gave birth to a female who gave birth to two females. I am one of four sisters. Other people will take up the other fights. This one is mine. This is what I'm passionate about, mostly because it was settled forever ago. Women had/have the right to get pregnant or not, without celibacy being their only option. When Rush decided that if a woman chose to be sexually active, she was choosing to be a slut, and he went on for three days, and most everybody here backed him? That was a major eye-opener for me.

 

[kaz]

I speak from my fear. The rest of it matters - of course it matters. I am a woman who gave birth to a female who gave birth to two females. I am one of four sisters. Other people will take up the other fights. This one is mine. This is what I'm passionate about, mostly because it was settled forever ago. Women had/have the right to get pregnant or not, without celibacy being their only option. When Rush decided that if a woman chose to be sexually active, she was choosing to be a slut, and he went on for three days, and most everybody here backed him? That was a major eye-opener for me.

You have that right.

 

[Foxfyre]

I speak from my fear. The rest of it matters - of course it matters. I am a woman who gave birth to a female who gave birth to two females. I am one of four sisters. Other people will take up the other fights. This one is mine. This is what I'm passionate about, mostly because it was settled forever ago. Women had/have the right to get pregnant or not, without celibacy being their only option. When Rush decided that if a woman chose to be sexually active, she was choosing to be a slut, and he went on for three days, and most everybody here backed him? That was a major eye-opener for me.

You have that right.

No she doesn't. Rush went over the line a bit in his characterization of Sandra Fluke, but he has never said that women who are sexually active are sluts. He said that those who expect others to pay for them to be sexually active are prostitutes or sluts.

There is a huge difference between those two things.

 

[Foxfyre]

The fact is, we women can't have it both ways. If we want to be treated equally with the men, we have to be willing to stand on our own two feet, pay our own way, and do what the men are willing to do. We can't on one hand says that because we are women we are entitled to this or that or others should take care of whatever are our needs as women or we have to have special consideration as women and then complain when we think we are treated differently.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Cigar anyone? How about a revealing tweet? Maybe a car ride into the lake? Or some secret service protection?

Damn those republicans.

 

[kaz]

I speak from my fear. The rest of it matters - of course it matters. I am a woman who gave birth to a female who gave birth to two females. I am one of four sisters. Other people will take up the other fights. This one is mine. This is what I'm passionate about, mostly because it was settled forever ago. Women had/have the right to get pregnant or not, without celibacy being their only option. When Rush decided that if a woman chose to be sexually active, she was choosing to be a slut, and he went on for three days, and most everybody here backed him? That was a major eye-opener for me.

You have that right.

No she doesn't. Rush went over the line a bit in his characterization of Sandra Fluke, but he has never said that women who are sexually active are sluts. He said that those who expect others to pay for them to be sexually active are prostitutes or sluts.

There is a huge difference between those two things.

I meant I agreed with her that she has the right to focus on this issue. I understand I wasn't very clear on which part of her post I was agreeing with. I agree with you on Rush completely and have made the same argument. It was Fluke who made her sex life an issue, not Rush. When Fluke came to me and told me to pay for her contraception, she opened the door to my opinion on her sex life. You don't get to say...pay for me to have sex...you have no right to comment on my having sex...

 

[BDBoop]

I still say that she was asking for insurance to cover her BC. You know - the insurance she pays premiums on.

 

[BDBoop]

This is what a lot of women in America are thinking.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I still say that she was asking for insurance to cover her BC. You know - the insurance she pays premiums on.

And she is free to shop around for said coverage. Or she could buy it on her own.

I'd like to have free oil changes on my auto insurance too. Think Obama can get er done?

 

[kaz]

I still say that she was asking for insurance to cover her BC. You know - the insurance she pays premiums on.

No, she wasn't paying for it because it wasn't covered under her policy. By government forcing them to cover it, the cost of her classmate's policies will go up to cover the expected cost of her having her contraception paid for. It's no different then "unfunded liabilities" that liberals oppose when the Federal government does it to States. Why should her classmates be forced to pay for her contraception?

 

[BDBoop]

What is the point of insurance then. They are making more money than God, and heaven forfend it should actually to go offset the payer's expenses. What a load of bull.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

What is the point of insurance then. They are making more money than God, and heaven forfend it should actually to go offset the payer's expenses. What a load of bull.

The point of insurance is as it has always been. A private company trying to turn a profit by selling you a service. Take away the profit and you take away the product. Which coincidentally I believe was Obamas plan all along.

 

[Wry Catcher]

What is the point of insurance then. They are making more money than God, and heaven forfend it should actually to go offset the payer's expenses. What a load of bull.

The point of insurance is as it has always been. A private company trying to turn a profit by selling you a service. Take away the profit and you take away the product. Which coincidentally I believe was Obamas plan all along.

I believe you're an idiot. My belief has more evidence than what you propose is Obama's plan.

 

[BDBoop]

What is the point of insurance then. They are making more money than God, and heaven forfend it should actually to go offset the payer's expenses. What a load of bull.

The point of insurance is as it has always been. A private company trying to turn a profit by selling you a service. Take away the profit and you take away the product. Which coincidentally I believe was Obamas plan all along.

Really? And just how big a profit do they need?

 

[Foxfyre]

I still say that she was asking for insurance to cover her BC. You know - the insurance she pays premiums on.

She was asking government to FORCE the university to provide the coverage through their insurance. She wasn't petitioning the university to do it which could be defensible though the university should always be able to say no. She wasn't petitioning the insurance company to do it which would be defensible though the insurance company should always have the right to say no. She wanted the government to see that she was provided free contraceptives. To a free people, there is nothing defensible about that.