No end in sight to 'war on women' att...

No end in sight to 'war on women' attacks

There are 332 comments on the Politico story from Nov 10, 2013, titled No end in sight to 'war on women' attacks. In it, Politico reports that:

Hardly a commercial break went by in October when Virginia voters weren't reminded of Ken Cuccinelli's far-right views on abortion and other social issues.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Politico.

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#99 Nov 13, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>And it was christian extremists who attacked blacks all across the south for decades, so by your logic we should be able to ban Christian churches anywhere below the Manson-Nixon line.
Oxymoron

“Hillary, thirty years of lying”

Since: Nov 08

Paris

#100 Nov 13, 2013
Bitner wrote:
<quoted text>The 'trends' you are 'seeing' don't exist.

Once again, abortion has been around for all of human history. It has been legal in this country for more years than it was illegal, advertised in newspapers in the very beginning of our country's existence. There are no new 'trends' there.

Your paranoid fantasies are just that; fantasies.
Do you have a bill number where it was legislated as legal? Didn't think so.

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#101 Nov 13, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a bill number where it was legislated as legal? Didn't think so.
Don't need one. It was enough that it wasn't declared illegal.

Don't be any more foolish than you must.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#102 Nov 13, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a bill number where it was legislated as legal? Didn't think so.
The default position of all actions is to be legal. Laws are made to declare specific ones to be illegal.
conservative crapola

“Hicksville Hootenanny”

Since: Sep 13

Kornfield Kounty

#103 Nov 13, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a bill number where it was legislated as legal? Didn't think so.
And yet, abortion remains a bustling industry in okiehomo. LMAO.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#104 Nov 13, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
Georgetown could have provided they give back all public money and only accept closed students to their university who are members of some association or club exclusive to those individuals.
Preventing them from advertising their programs on commercial services in print or via some electronic network.
Private clubs and facilities can discriminate. Any business open to the general public can not. That has been sealed by the Court already.
<quoted text>
Georgetown should have just as much right to public money as anyone else. It's just that you don't think they have a right to exercise their freedom under the constitution. Those rights have been eroding, especially now. Years of brainwashing via the media have enabled liberals to push their agenda forward and it's been taking hold. The gullibles see nothing wrong with govt. interference in the rights of everyone which is only getting worse.

Public money is used in ways that go against taxpayer religious beliefs and that is ok...but not ok for folks to use public money in to support entities that do not support contraceptives in their health plan. This is an example of an intrusive govt. which is becoming more and more so.

The liberal elite have been setting the table for this kind of control for decades with the use of the media to champion their causes. Socialized care has been a big accomplishment and it is only a matter of time before everyone has fallen prey to its control.

When Washington can get away with all the lies while blatantly exposing their own hypocrisy, it should be no surprise to anyone how easily this country will give away it's freedom for govt. domination.

Liberals were once those who fought against the 'establishment' and now they want to BE the establishment. Ironically, liberals have been inside the establishment for some time. ACA has been a priority for the socialist party and by working with the democrats, this has become a reality. The people have grown lazy and stupid. Public educators have taught them to be followers, average and to never question authority. Individuality and creativity is discouraged for the greater good. When these kids become adults, they can easily accept being controlled by big govt. Some animals that are raised in captivity will not leave their captors....they can be domesticated and rely on them for their survival. This country is ready for a take over which is why ACA will move forward. The voices will continue to be silenced as the liberal media paves the way for big govt. You have been brought up to follow and to serve which is why enslaving yourself to big govt. is your mission.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#105 Nov 13, 2013
Le Jimbo wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a bill number where it was legislated as legal? Didn't think so.
Prior to Roe v Wade, abortion was a state issue. There was no federal law either way because it wasn't a federal issue.

States had their own laws with most imposing some restrictions on abortions.

New York, Alaska, Washington, & Hawaii legalized unrestricted abortions in 1970.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#106 Nov 13, 2013
incredulous wrote:
ACA has been a priority for the socialist party and by working with the democrats, this has become a reality.
When Republicans pushed the same basic idea as the ACA in the 1990s, it was a "personal responsibility law". Now it's evil socialism.

Funny how that works.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#107 Nov 13, 2013
Buffalo Bull wrote:
<quoted text>
Compared to the United States...
What do Canada, England and say...Cuba spend per capita on health care?
Where do they rank compared to the United States in infant mortality...or life span?
I'm sure you have those 'anwers' although you most likely don't understand them. The demographics in Canada, England and Cuba are quite different. Attorney fees alone in the United States could almost be soley responsible for the cost differences!

The United States has experimented with managed care programs somewhat similar to the above mentioned and the delivery results in inferior care. HMO plans have a notorious reputation but these plans are still better than having the govt. take over our health care. Even those living in countries with govt. funded health care go to the United States when necessary. On the other hand, there are opportunities for govts. to use their people as guinea pigs since they provide their health care. There have been some advances in those countries because the United States is more cautious about experimenting on its people.

I don't know how many people you know who live in other countries but I've never heard anything good about their health care from those who have it. If you've spent any time in any of these countries, you would have a little more insight and realize socialized medicine is not really in our best interest.

Handing over control to big govt. is never a good idea....we should be breaking free from it.

Why do you so easily want to offer up your independence for govt. dependance?

“Blessed Be”

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#108 Nov 13, 2013
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
When Republicans pushed the same basic idea as the ACA in the 1990s, it was a "personal responsibility law". Now it's evil socialism.
Funny how that works.
LOL, you got that right!

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#109 Nov 13, 2013
incredulous wrote:
Attorney fees alone in the United States could almost be soley responsible for the cost differences!
Source, please.
incredulous wrote:
I don't know how many people you know who live in other countries but I've never heard anything good about their health care from those who have it.
That's strange, because most people from those countries think our system is a joke and can't believe that millions of sick people simply go without care.
Eric Gustafson

Virginia Beach, VA

#110 Nov 13, 2013
Georgetown does have access to public funds, as much as any other organization.

That's not based on what I think, it's the law in America. Georgetown and any organization has access to the very Freedoms and Liberties as any other. What are you talking about exactly?

It's not a new legal restriction that prevents organizations from discrimination. Those laws have been on the Federal books Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employment laws in the United States have sought to protect virtually every individual from discrimination.

Your problem is not with me but the laws under which Americans live and have adopted for our society.

Religious groups can apply for public funds, but that gives no religious organization the power to discriminate against any American.

If a religious or any othere organization wished to discriminate or make participation exclusive, they can not do so with an open door and public funds, but must limit themselves to being a private organization exclusive to their membership and forgo accepting public funds.

This has been the law for more than 49 years. how is it you can not know the policy of the Government and society you live?

Your argument is 4 plus decades to late.
incredulous wrote:
<quoted text>Georgetown should have just as much right to public money as anyone else. It's just that you don't think they have a right to exercise their freedom under the constitution. Those rights have been eroding, especially now. Years of brainwashing via the media have enabled liberals to push their agenda forward and it's been taking hold. The gullibles see nothing wrong with govt. interference in the rights of everyone which is only getting worse.
Public money is used in ways that go against taxpayer religious beliefs and that is ok...but not ok for folks to use public money in to support entities that do not support contraceptives in their health plan. This is an example of an intrusive govt. which is becoming more and more so.
The liberal elite have been setting the table for this kind of control for decades with the use of the media to champion their causes. Socialized care has been a big accomplishment and it is only a matter of time before everyone has fallen prey to its control.
When Washington can get away with all the lies while blatantly exposing their own hypocrisy, it should be no surprise to anyone how easily this country will give away it's freedom for govt. domination.
Liberals were once those who fought against the 'establishment' and now they want to BE the establishment. Ironically, liberals have been inside the establishment for some time. ACA has been a priority for the socialist party and by working with the democrats, this has become a reality. The people have grown lazy and stupid. Public educators have taught them to be followers, average and to never question authority. Individuality and creativity is discouraged for the greater good. When these kids become adults, they can easily accept being controlled by big govt. Some animals that are raised in captivity will not leave their captors....they can be domesticated and rely on them for their survival. This country is ready for a take over which is why ACA will move forward. The voices will continue to be silenced as the liberal media paves the way for big govt. You have been brought up to follow and to serve which is why enslaving yourself to big govt. is your mission.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#111 Nov 13, 2013
Ink wrote:
<quoted text>
If women are in charge with their votes, then they will get exactly what they want. They have already managed to dehumanize the unborn children so it won't be long before the old, infirmed or incapacitated are disposed of. It is the way the culture is headed.
I would like to think women are 'in charge' of their votes although I surely hope they will never become insensitive to those who have been born. On the other hand, our culture has deteriorated....all the same. As we give up our personal liberty, we give up our identity. When we devalue ourselves to the point that we believe we need to rely on big govt......we are at risk to devalue each other and will approve the use of death panels for our elderly.

Putting a value on people has less to do with abortion and more to do with allowing the govt. to control us. People should be allowed to make their own choices without govt. interference. Ironically, the liberal elite want us to believe we need to be controlled by them in order to be happy.
Eric Gustafson

Virginia Beach, VA

#112 Nov 13, 2013
If you have never lived in another country how is it you can be so certain of what their Health Care systems are like? Or, are you repeating a biased opinion heard somewhere else?

Those individuals who can afford it, are optioning to go abroad for medical procedures where the cost are more beneficial and the services are comparable to the treatments and facilities here in America.

Medical tourism in Israel hurting Israelis?
www.usatoday.com/.../11/11/israel-medical-tou... Cached
People from Eastern Europe, Cyprus and the United States have been flocking to Israeli hospitals over the past five years for inexpensive, high-quality

CDC Features - Medical Tourism - Getting Medical Care in ...
www.cdc.gov/Features/MedicalTourism Cached
Going Abroad for Medical Care "Medical tourism" refers to traveling to another country for medical care. It's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents

America is not the most efficient or only means to acquiring Health Care services.
incredulous wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure you have those 'anwers' although you most likely don't understand them. The demographics in Canada, England and Cuba are quite different. Attorney fees alone in the United States could almost be soley responsible for the cost differences!
The United States has experimented with managed care programs somewhat similar to the above mentioned and the delivery results in inferior care. HMO plans have a notorious reputation but these plans are still better than having the govt. take over our health care. Even those living in countries with govt. funded health care go to the United States when necessary. On the other hand, there are opportunities for govts. to use their people as guinea pigs since they provide their health care. There have been some advances in those countries because the United States is more cautious about experimenting on its people.
I don't know how many people you know who live in other countries but I've never heard anything good about their health care from those who have it. If you've spent any time in any of these countries, you would have a little more insight and realize socialized medicine is not really in our best interest.
Handing over control to big govt. is never a good idea....we should be breaking free from it.
Why do you so easily want to offer up your independence for govt. dependance?
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#113 Nov 13, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
Georgetown does have access to public funds, as much as any other organization.
That's not based on what I think, it's the law in America. Georgetown and any organization has access to the very Freedoms and Liberties as any other. What are you talking about exactly?
It's not a new legal restriction that prevents organizations from discrimination. Those laws have been on the Federal books Since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employment laws in the United States have sought to protect virtually every individual from discrimination.
Your problem is not with me but the laws under which Americans live and have adopted for our society.
Religious groups can apply for public funds, but that gives no religious organization the power to discriminate against any American.
If a religious or any othere organization wished to discriminate or make participation exclusive, they can not do so with an open door and public funds, but must limit themselves to being a private organization exclusive to their membership and forgo accepting public funds.
This has been the law for more than 49 years. how is it you can not know the policy of the Government and society you live?
Your argument is 4 plus decades to late.
<quoted text>
Quit talking in circles. Georgetown had a right to deny bc coverage and the govt. is getting in the way of those rights. You just want to change the definition of discrimination. Freedom has been eroding over the decades and it is quite obvious when I read your posts. You are absolutely clueless. Some of us will not go quietly while the govt. imposes it's will on those who insist on their right to freedom.
Eric Gustafson

Virginia Beach, VA

#114 Nov 13, 2013
Georgetown is not exempt from Federal Laws.... it's the law there is no right to violate laws. That is not changing a definition.

Nobody in America is exempt from the law.... period. You're not familiar with American policy and are proposing anarchy and rebellion.
incredulous wrote:
<quoted text>Quit talking in circles. Georgetown had a right to deny bc coverage and the govt. is getting in the way of those rights. You just want to change the definition of discrimination. Freedom has been eroding over the decades and it is quite obvious when I read your posts. You are absolutely clueless. Some of us will not go quietly while the govt. imposes it's will on those who insist on their right to freedom.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#115 Nov 13, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
Georgetown is not exempt from Federal Laws.... it's the law there is no right to violate laws. That is not changing a definition.
Nobody in America is exempt from the law.... period. You're not familiar with American policy and are proposing anarchy and rebellion.
<quoted text>
Spoken like a true socialist! You are incorrect and misinformed. The socialists have stolen more rights.....right from under our noses! The Georgetown fiasco proved it to be so. oscumma has been force feeding Lady Liberty socialized medicine and she has been choking it down bit by bit. Americans are standing by watching her heave and slowly die. Talk about a war on women.......she is our most precious and yet most abused.
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#116 Nov 13, 2013
Eric Gustafson wrote:
If you have never lived in another country how is it you can be so certain of what their Health Care systems are like? Or, are you repeating a biased opinion heard somewhere else?
Those individuals who can afford it, are optioning to go abroad for medical procedures where the cost are more beneficial and the services are comparable to the treatments and facilities here in America.
Medical tourism in Israel hurting Israelis?
www.usatoday.com/.../11/11/israel-medical-tou... Cached
People from Eastern Europe, Cyprus and the United States have been flocking to Israeli hospitals over the past five years for inexpensive, high-quality
CDC Features - Medical Tourism - Getting Medical Care in ...
www.cdc.gov/Features/MedicalTourism Cached
Going Abroad for Medical Care "Medical tourism" refers to traveling to another country for medical care. It's estimated that up to 750,000 US residents
America is not the most efficient or only means to acquiring Health Care services.
<quoted text>
I've had family members living in other countries and lived in them myself. I have first had experiences with socialized medicine. I'll never forget the chat I had in a cab in NYC when I was only 19. He was a nephrologist from England who told me how I should count my blessings that I lived in the United States. It was an eye opening conversation and one that I understood even more as I got older.

There are experimental procedures that have not been able to get through the federal red tape in the US which is why some go outside the country. You can try all day long to support your view but the reality does not go in your favor. Govt. controlled health care is NOT best for a people who want to be independent and free.

Since: Aug 12

Buffalo, NY

#117 Nov 13, 2013
incredulous wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sure you have those 'anwers' although you most likely don't understand them. The demographics in Canada, England and Cuba are quite different. Attorney fees alone in the United States could almost be soley responsible for the cost differences!
The United States has experimented with managed care programs somewhat similar to the above mentioned and the delivery results in inferior care. HMO plans have a notorious reputation but these plans are still better than having the govt. take over our health care. Even those living in countries with govt. funded health care go to the United States when necessary. On the other hand, there are opportunities for govts. to use their people as guinea pigs since they provide their health care. There have been some advances in those countries because the United States is more cautious about experimenting on its people.
I don't know how many people you know who live in other countries but I've never heard anything good about their health care from those who have it. If you've spent any time in any of these countries, you would have a little more insight and realize socialized medicine is not really in our best interest.
Handing over control to big govt. is never a good idea....we should be breaking free from it.
Why do you so easily want to offer up your independence for govt. dependance?
You said..."
"The demographics in Canada, England and Cuba are quite different. Attorney fees alone in the United States could almost be soley responsible for the cost differences!"

We trail two third world hell holes in vital statistics. Countries with profuond poverty.
In Chilie they pay about $1,200 per capita, and live about a year longer...
In Cuba, a commie third world hell hole the pay less than $700...
We pay $8,600 per capita...So in order for the lawyers to do what you have claimed..they would need to pocket 85% of our health care cost.....85%....
Do you wish to re- think that?
----------
You said...
"If you've spent any time in any of these countries, you would have a little more insight and realize socialized medicine is not really in our best interest."

I can see Canada from where I sit...In 5 minutes I could be in Fort Erie..a trip I have made more times than I can count. The demographics of Canada are not different....I know Canadians, well. Worked with them played hckey aginst them in my 55 years not nce was i told that they admire and envy our system
----------
By the way I favor tort reform....but the laywers do not account for anything close to the difference.
You know what does?
1)Corporate price gouging...
2)A system of payments that rewards procedures and not results
3) The uninsured are the most expensive demographic group.
4) the lawyers....
----------
Seeing you have all the answers....
In the United States...which form of health care has higher over head costs...The gov't run medicare?...Or yuor private insurance and why?

http://kff.org/global-indicator/health-expend...
incredulous

Carmel, IN

#118 Nov 13, 2013
The_Box wrote:
<quoted text>
Source, please.
<quoted text>
That's strange, because most people from those countries think our system is a joke and can't believe that millions of sick people simply go without care.
Most people? You've had conservations with most people in other countries? You have no idea how pathetic these systems really are. Even the people there, don't know how bad it is. How would they know? Talk to the folks who come over here and you will find out differently. The majority will go along with the only thing they know. They are sheeple and have learned to accept their way of life....they know no other way.

If you've ever received health care in England, you would be simply appalled. Poor hygiene would be the understatement. What do you expect from a people who have no problem leaving a the same basket of rolls on the table at a restaurant for their patrons to share throughout the morning.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News GOP establishment plans Trump takedown (Aug '15) Aug 17 Trumpty Dumpty Korea 740
News Hacker posts personal info of House Democrats a... Aug 14 Le Jimbo 2
News Debbie Wasserman blasts emails questioning Sand... Aug 12 South Knox Hombre 1
News WikiLeaks, Assange continue hacking away at Ame... Aug 3 LeDuped 17
News What The DNC Leaks Say About Our Need For Self-... Aug 2 southern at heart 3
News South Florida braces for affects of possible Ha... (Jan '10) Jul 31 Missy 17
News Cal Thomas: The juicy bits you may have missed ... Jul 31 Le Jimbo 8
More from around the web