out of touch republicans

dancepartner

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

gimmesometruth27

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

Bentleyspop

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

Its even in their binders!!

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

People fall for this crap all the time (including me of course), but all this war on women thing is a political strategy by the Dems to keep power. And it has been very successful because people are into headlines and one liners and not the details of the situations.

hedonist

I'm sorry, but I find "spinning" anything as ridiculous.

Just report things as they are.

I think cincy's last line of his post is right on.

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

it is?

Jeanwah

cincybearcat wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

People fall for this crap all the time (including me of course), but all this war on women thing is a political strategy by the Dems to keep power.

Spoken like a true republican... :fp:

cincybearcat wrote:

And it has been very successful because people are into headlines and one liners and not the details of the situations.

That can be said for everyone, everywhere. Especially anyone caught up in mainstream media.

Back to this thing against women that republicans have. Tell me, exactly what republicans plan to do with all the lives they save from abortions. Do they propose bills to help them flourish and be taken care of? No! That would be socialism! Because this all just a sham to control women's reproductive rights while continuing to claim that they're against government everything, while maintaining some kind of gov't intervention in nation-wide abortion issues. What a joke.

mikepegg44

Jeanwah wrote:

That can be said for everyone, everywhere. Especially anyone caught up in mainstream media.

Back to this thing against women that republicans have. Tell me, exactly what republicans plan to do with all the lives they save from abortions. Do they propose bills to help them flourish and be taken care of? No! That would be socialism! Because this all just a sham to control women's reproductive rights while continuing to claim that they're against government everything, while maintaining some kind of gov't intervention in nation-wide abortion issues. What a joke.

why would they need to take care of the kids? they view abortion as murder, they don't propose extra bills to take care of every American who has not been murdered, but murder is still illegal. There are protections for kids and programs for kids, if the new kids who would have been aborted qualify for those programs they will benefit from them like any other.

they aren't against a woman's right to choose because they don't like women, they are against abortion because they don't like the idea terminating pregnancies, the result of which is a dead human being (in their mind of course and not an argument I really support). That is how they rectify the idea of wanting government out of people's lives but still telling people they need to remain pregnant. Not sure why that distinction cannot be seen. It is not a sinister plan to control women at every turn.

But you may be right, the crusade to make abortion illegal may just be a sham to specifically control women.

cincybearcat

Jeanwah wrote:

Spoken like a true republican... :fp:

Keep your facepalms to yourself. It is clear that you don;t have anything of value to say.


Seriously, the admins should have all been given a 2 week time out for adding the facepalm. Talk about instigating shit.

JimmyV

Is the war on women, if it exists, a war on all women or a war just on women who disagree with the GOP platform? Is there a war on women who are "pro-life"? And if there is not, isn't that proof that we could come up with a more descriptive and accurate term than "war on women"?

Jeanwah

cincybearcat wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Spoken like a true republican... :fp:

Keep your facepalms to yourself. It is clear that you don;t have anything of value to say.


Seriously, the admins should have all been given a 2 week time out for adding the facepalm. Talk about instigating shit.

Instigating? Really? You're going to make a claim that the reason republicans have zero respect for the female voter a democrat strategy? That's a classic defensive statement without any backup.

And the admins added the faceplant emoticon to the group of emoticons to be used. If they don't like it being used, then they should get rid of it altogether.

Jeanwah

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

That can be said for everyone, everywhere. Especially anyone caught up in mainstream media.

Back to this thing against women that republicans have. Tell me, exactly what republicans plan to do with all the lives they save from abortions. Do they propose bills to help them flourish and be taken care of? No! That would be socialism! Because this all just a sham to control women's reproductive rights while continuing to claim that they're against government everything, while maintaining some kind of gov't intervention in nation-wide abortion issues. What a joke.

why would they need to take care of the kids? they view abortion as murder, they don't propose extra bills to take care of every American who has not been murdered, but murder is still illegal. There are protections for kids and programs for kids, if the new kids who would have been aborted qualify for those programs they will benefit from them like any other.

they aren't against a woman's right to choose because they don't like women, they are against abortion because they don't like the idea terminating pregnancies, the result of which is a dead human being (in their mind of course and not an argument I really support). That is how they rectify the idea of wanting government out of people's lives but still telling people they need to remain pregnant. Not sure why that distinction cannot be seen. It is not a sinister plan to control women at every turn.

But you may be right, the crusade to make abortion illegal may just be a sham to specifically control women.

You can't propose a law to outlaw abortion if you're not going to take responsibility for its consequences. And that means hoards of unwanted babies and kids. The state systems are already overloaded with foster kids. They are hardly sufficiently in good care, these state programs are constantly looking for foster parents.
If politicians refuse to back birth control (and republicans do) then they need to take full responsibility of the problem that will result from such a law taking effect.

Do I really need to remind you people what's on the other pages of this thread AGAIN? The opposing the violence against women act? New Mexico Bill Would Criminalize Abortions After Rape As 'Tampering With Evidence'? Defunding planned parenthood? Demonizing women who want contraception?

cincybearcat

Jeanwah wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Spoken like a true republican... :fp:

Keep your facepalms to yourself. It is clear that you don;t have anything of value to say.


Seriously, the admins should have all been given a 2 week time out for adding the facepalm. Talk about instigating shit.

Instigating? Really? You're going to make a claim that the reason republicans have zero respect for the female voter a democrat strategy? That's a classic defensive statement without any backup.

And the admins added the faceplant emoticon to the group of emoticons to be used. If they don't like it being used, then they should get rid of it altogether.

Clearly you failed reading comprehension. I said the admins should remove the facepalm thing. All they did was instigate negativity by adding it.



And about this ... "You're going to make a claim that the reason republicans have zero respect for the female voter a democrat strategy"

I don't believe the republicans have zero respect for female voters". I do believe that the Dem party has twisted a number of issues to make it appear so to the headline readers. And I believe it has proven to be a winning strategy for them and they will continue to manipulate people until those people decide to actually skip the headline and look at the details.

It's one thing to disagree with policy, opinion, etc. But to claim a war against women? Really? The dems are pulling the sex card, just as they always pull the race card. And the republicans are so stupid they keep letting them get away with it.

gimmesometruth27

mikepegg44 wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

dancepartner wrote:

Jeanwah; you've done a good job holding your own here.
And for myself, you've opened my eyes to "the War on women". I'm not so sure this is not an accurate sentiment. Is it being spun? Probably. Should it be? Probably.

probably because the war on women is a real thing. it is even in the republican party platform.

it is?

yes it is. and the republicans on here need to own it and not deflect from it.

Jeanwah

Ya know Cincy, you can't spin the fact that Republicans don't like women using contraception (the defunding of Planned Parenthood). Something else that can't be spun is their resistance to renewing the Violence Against Women Act. Another thing is the mandating of New Mexico with their criminalizing abortions after a rape. How about Todd Akin and his ignorance? You can blame the other side for spinning as much as you'd like but the proof is there.

I'm not even a Dem but I know of Dems who are Pro-women's rights (Tester, Dean). Find me one Republican that defends women and their rights.

gimmesometruth27

way to represent us here, mr senator... very presidential indeed...

McCain compares Iranian leader to monkey; draws GOP charge of racism

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 ... acism?lite

Updated 12:52 pm ET. Always one to speak -- or Tweet -- his mind, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) Monday made a joke comparing Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to a monkey, something one Republican congressman charged was “racist.”

“So Ahmadinejad wants to be first Iranian in space - wasn't he just there last week?” McCain said in a tweet that also linked to a story about Iran launching a monkey into space.

Some didn’t take so kindly to the not-so-diplomatic quip, prompting McCain, 76, to respond: “Re: Iran space tweet - lighten up folks, can't everyone take a joke?”

Seeing that, Michigan congressman Rep. Justin Amash, 32, shot back.

“Maybe you should wisen up & not make racist jokes,” Amash tweeted.

Not everyone on the right agreed with Amash. Conservative John Podhoretz, for example, Tweeted this: "How dare McCain say something demeaning & disparaging abt the foremost anti-Semite on the planet." And this: "So...it's defend-the-Jew-hater-from-the-war-hero day."

It’s not the first time McCain’s made a joke about Iran that landed him in some hot water. During his run for president in 2007, McCain sang about bombing the country.

Asked by a GOP primary voter when the U.S. would send an “air-mail message to Tehran,” McCain said, “That old Beach Boys’ song, ‘Bomb Iran?’ Bomb, bomb, bomb—, anyway.”

McCain’s response then as now? It’s just a joke -- "get a life.”

“When veterans are together, veterans joke,” McCain said at the time. “And I was with veterans and we were joking. And if somebody can’t understand that, my answer is, ‘Please, get a life.’”

JimmyV

John McCain's time has come and gone. There are so many ways to joke about this fool wanting to go to space and he settles on comparing Iranians to monkeys?

mikepegg44

Jeanwah wrote:

You can't propose a law to outlaw abortion if you're not going to take responsibility for its consequences. And that means hoards of unwanted babies and kids. The state systems are already overloaded with foster kids. They are hardly sufficiently in good care, these state programs are constantly looking for foster parents.
If politicians refuse to back birth control (and republicans do) then they need to take full responsibility of the problem that will result from such a law taking effect.

Do I really need to remind you people what's on the other pages of this thread AGAIN? The opposing the violence against women act? New Mexico Bill Would Criminalize Abortions After Rape As 'Tampering With Evidence'? Defunding planned parenthood? Demonizing women who want contraception?

I put it in earlier and never received an answer, so I will ask again, was the ACLU conducting a war on women for opposing VAWA back in '94?

I have already conceded that they do not have a specific platform policy that is pro women's individual rights, but that doesn't mean they have a platform agenda specifically against women does it?

do you reject the idea that opposing VAWA for specific reasons that were pointed out earlier by JP I believe, and opposing abortion can be done from a motivation outside of perpetrating "war on women"?

brianlux

mikepegg44 wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

You can't propose a law to outlaw abortion if you're not going to take responsibility for its consequences. And that means hoards of unwanted babies and kids. The state systems are already overloaded with foster kids. They are hardly sufficiently in good care, these state programs are constantly looking for foster parents.
If politicians refuse to back birth control (and republicans do) then they need to take full responsibility of the problem that will result from such a law taking effect.

Do I really need to remind you people what's on the other pages of this thread AGAIN? The opposing the violence against women act? New Mexico Bill Would Criminalize Abortions After Rape As 'Tampering With Evidence'? Defunding planned parenthood? Demonizing women who want contraception?

I put it in earlier and never received an answer, so I will ask again, was the ACLU conducting a war on women for opposing VAWA back in '94?

I have already conceded that they do not have a specific platform policy that is pro women's individual rights, but that doesn't mean they have a platform agenda specifically against women does it?

do you reject the idea that opposing VAWA for specific reasons that were pointed out earlier by JP I believe, and opposing abortion can be done from a motivation outside of perpetrating "war on women"?

Doesn't the ACLU run pretty far afield from partisan politics? I don't see any connection between them and Reps or Dems.

mikepegg44

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

yes it is.

where is it in the platform? I couldn't find it. Do you have the specific verbiage they used, I am interested in seeing it as this is the first I have heard they actually are conducting a war on women.

if you oppose abortion being legal, or the vawa for specific reasons, none of which include being 'for' violence on women, or equal pay laws... does that mean you are against women? What if you are a woman and oppose those things? Are you conducting a war on yourself out of self loathing?

Can you be against abortion without being a part of a war on women?

Do house reps who do not think expansion of unemployment is a good idea hate the poor?

And people wonder why there is so much vitriol in politics.

If you are against my position, you HATE and are against the group it would benefit the most.