In ‘war on women,’ the tables are turned on Democrats
Oh, the irony (from the Daily Caller):
Feminist activist Gloria Steinem and several chapters of the National Organization for Women (NOW) have condemned the Democratic National Committee for “discrimination against mothers with young children” during the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte, N.C.
“Women are the key to a Democratic victory, and sometimes, children are the key to women,” Steinem said in a statement. “It’s both right and smart for the Democratic Convention to behave as if children exist.”
Goodness gracious, what kind of discrimination could be going on? Is the DNC not allowing mothers to be delegates? Read on …
The NOW chapters of Southern California — including Hollywood, Long Beach-South Bay, Pacific Shore and Palm Spring — voiced concern this week that the Democratic National Convention will not offer automatic access for young children on the convention floor, and will not be providing childcare during the event.
Whoa. Denying free stuff that women want?
#waronwomen!
But wait, it gets worse:
According to mother and 2012 Democratic National Convention delegate Susie Shannon, the policy is disenfranchising women like her.
“Moms with young children six years of age and under who cannot be left at home, some of whom are breastfeeding, are relegated to second-class status within the Democratic Convention,” she explained in a statement, “unable to participate as a delegate due to antiquated policies and inadequate accommodations that were apparently in place before women’s suffrage.” …
As we all know, the GOP wants to turn the clock back to the 1950s. But at least women could vote back then! The DNC apparently is stuck in the 1910s!
Read more
But the greatest warriors in this war are the Republicans: Who want smaller, less intrusive government, but would all prefer for every woman seeking an abortion to have a vaginal ultra-sound; they would rather return to back alley abortions and require women to go to Mexico to get potentially dangerous black-market abortion drugs; to make women and doctors criminals who participate in abortion, because of personhood laws; and they make all this necessary because of their attitude against contraception. All this in the name of God. And they have the gall to bring up issues like the one mentioned in this article as though it were on an equal footing.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
My, my, you are the reactionary, aren’t you?
Tell me, what is your objection to an ultrasound prior to an abortion? So let’s change the senerio: you go to a doctor that all he does is surgeries. He tells you that you have an abdominal tumor and if you want to get rid of it, you have to have surgery. Do you just accept what he says, and not ask that any CT scan or MRI be done so that you can actually see what he is talking about? Aren’t you one of these people who think that doctors are just money-grabbing evil capitalists who are willing to do anything for a buck? Do you ask the doctor what the procedure is for removing that tumor? Or do you just put yourself in the hands of someone you are meeting for the very first time and let them have their way with you?
Again, it is clear you have never seen an actual abortion.
@Liberal1 (objectivity):
Does Sandra Fluke have a right to my earnings?
@Liberal1 (objectivity): Omigod! It’s BOHICA man2 standing up for 1.2+ million murdered, aborted babies per year. I guess you didn’t get the word that we are all wondering why your mother didn’t eliminate your drain on natural resources and negative carbon footprint. Seems to me that you have a duty to save the world starting with yourself. Please have your exit noted in FA and we will blog appropriate eulogies.
And to cap their theme of the Republican War on Women:
The guest of honor and keynote speaker will be “is” President William Blythe Clinton, the disbarred lawyer, most recent subject of an impeachment, famous in song and story for “put some ice on that”.
Yes, the Clinton of Monica Lewinsky fame.
Yes, the Clinton of Kathleen Willey.
Yes the Clinton of bimbo eruptions.
The Clinton of “lick it”.
THAT is what the Democrats think of women. Oddly enough, the Democrats are remarkably Islamic in their regard for women: walk two paces behind, spread their legs on command, and submit to four wives.
But women will vote for Obama anyway, because he is “sexy”, whatever that means.
I wouldn’t worry too much about any of this. The only real problem that republicans might have with women voters this year is the record of what they’ve said and done in the House and in state legislatures since regaining majorities in the 2010 elections. Most likely no one will notice.
@Greg:
A recent poll by (2012) showed that women are more pro-life than pro-
deathabortion, 46% to 44% with the number of pro-choice decreasing as time goes by. Americans, on the whole, are more pro-life than pro-choice.So if you’re counting on Obama winning another term because he supports killing babies, even after they survive a botched abortion, you are betting on a dead horse.