truth-has-a-liberal-bias:

2012, B.C.?

blissandzen:

First came the soccer moms.

Then the security moms.

Will 2012 be the year of the “birth control moms”?

Just a few weeks ago, the notion would have seemed far-fetched. The country is deeply divided on abortion, but not on contraception; the vast majority of American women have used it, and access hasn’t been a front-burner political issue since the Supreme Court decided Griswold v. Connecticut in 1965.

But then Rick Santorum said states ought to have the right to outlaw the sale of contraception.

And Susan G. Komen for the Cure yanked its funding for Planned Parenthood.

And the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops teed off on President Barack Obama’s contraception policy.

And House Republicans invited a panel of five men — and no women — to debate the issue.

And a prominent Santorum supporter pined for the days when “the gals” put aspirin “between their knees” to ward off pregnancy.

Democratic strategist Celinda Lake says it’s enough to “really irritate” independent suburban moms and “re-engage” young, single women who haven’t tuned into the campaign so far.

And, she says, the stakes are high: Women backed Barack Obama in big numbers in 2008 but then swung right in 2010. If the president is to win reelection in 2012, he’ll need to win women back — and Lake and other Democrats see the GOP push on contraception as a gift that will make that easier.

“I feel like the world is spinning backwards,” said former Rep. Patricia Schroeder, who has often related the troubles she has as a young married law student getting her birth control prescriptions filled in the early 1960s. “If you had told me when I was in law school that this would be a debate in 2012, I would have thought you were nuts … And everyone I talk to thinks so, too.”

Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University, also sees the chance of a huge female backlash if the Republicans overreach.

“If women feel they are being targeted again, that women’s health is on the line — that’s not an argument you want to make in an election year,” she said.

“IF” the Republicans overreach?!? That ship sailed a long time ago. The Republicans have overreached so much that they’ve reached all the way back into the 19th century.

I think the republicans are trying to prove that they are different in every way from the democrats, and in doing so pushing themselves farther and farther from the realities of today and the freedoms of America they supposedly value so much, all the while whining that Obama is the one separating america.

via truth-has-a-liberal-bias 3 months ago link 33 notes
  1. queensbrin reblogged this from reagan-was-a-horrible-president
  2. goblinhoarder reblogged this from questionall
  3. azuucarnegra reblogged this from hairtrending
  4. hairtrending reblogged this from truth-has-a-liberal-bias
  5. stormandmoonlight reblogged this from questionall
  6. questionall reblogged this from reagan-was-a-horrible-president
  7. beckalina reblogged this from reagan-was-a-horrible-president
  8. youknowyougrow reblogged this from reagan-was-a-horrible-president
  9. dont-take-any-wooden-nickels reblogged this from reagan-was-a-horrible-president
  10. reagan-was-a-horrible-president reblogged this from truth-has-a-liberal-bias
  11. lovelybutton reblogged this from truth-has-a-liberal-bias
  12. howimetyourpadre reblogged this from truth-has-a-liberal-bias and added:
    I think the republicans are trying to prove that they are different in every way from the democrats, and in doing so...
  13. truth-has-a-liberal-bias reblogged this from blissandzen and added:
    Republicans overreach?!? That ship sailed...have overreached
  14. sarahlee310 reblogged this from blissandzen
  15. suitcaseheart reblogged this from blissandzen
  16. blissandzen posted this

blog comments powered by Disqus