Abortion Distortions 2014

Democratic Ads That Misrepresent GOP Positions

Posted on September 26, 2014


Analysis

In 2012, the Obama campaign repeatedly made the false claim that GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney was opposed to allowing abortions for pregnancies that resulted from rape or incest. That wasn’t true, as we pointed out – again and again. Now, we are seeing the same tactic being used by Democrats in several 2014 House and Senate elections.

In race after race, Democratic ads are misrepresenting, distorting and exaggerating their Republican opponents’ position on abortion to make them seem more strict (and therefore less popular) than they really are.
A False Claim About ‘Rape and Incest’

This ad by John Foust, the Democratic nominee for the House in Virginia’s 10th Congressional District, claims that Republican nominee Barbara Comstock “wants to make abortion illegal, even in cases of rape and incest.” But Comstock says the opposite: “I support a rape/incest/life of the mother exception on abortion,” she said in a statement relayed to us by her campaign.

And that’s not the first time Comstock has taken that position. She was asked specifically about where she stood on “abortion in cases of rape or incest” while seeking the endorsement of the anti-abortion Susan B. Anthony List Candidate Fund in July. The fund normally doesn’t make its questionnaires public, but in this case the group sent a letter giving the full text of Comstock’s response. “I do support a life of the mother and rape and incest exception for abortion,” the SBA quoted Comstock as stating.

The Foust website provides no support for the ad’s claim. When we pressed for an explanation, a Foust aide told us the claim was based on Comstock’s 2012 vote in favor of a bill that some referred to as a “personhood” measure in the Virginia House of Delegates, where she is a member.

That bill, however, would not have banned any abortions, and did not even mention rape or incest. It would have declared that under Virginia law, “The life of each human being begins at conception” and that unborn children would have “all the rights, privileges, and immunities available to other persons” in the state. But neither side claimed at the time that the bill would ban abortions in Virginia.

For one thing, the bill stated explicitly that the rights it would have granted to unborn children would be subject to “the Constitution of the United States and decisional interpretations thereof by the United States Supreme Court,” which has for more than 40 years held that states cannot outlaw abortion during the first months of a woman’s pregnancy. The Supreme Court first held that in the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, and reaffirmed that finding in the landmark 1992 case, Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Abortion foes who supported the bill expected far less of it than criminalizing abortions, but said it might have provided grounds for wrongful death lawsuits in some cases. “Had HB 1 been enacted, one practical effect would have been to create a wrongful death cause of action for the death of an unborn child in certain situations (for example, in instances of domestic violence),” said the Virginia Catholic Conference in a statement lamenting the bill’s failure. The bill passed the state House but later died in the state Senate.

Pro-abortion-rights groups didn’t go so far as to claim it would outlaw abortion, either. The worst that NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia said about it is that the “dangerous” measure would “lay the legal groundwork” to ban all abortions. But even if such “groundwork” was laid, Comstock states explicitly that she doesn’t favor banning abortion for victims of rape or incest as the Foust ad claims, and Foust has yet to produce any evidence that she does.

http://www.factcheck.org/2014/09/abortion-distortions-2014/

Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a republican and republicans don't want abortions to be legal.

If republicans put more legislation on the books to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including making hospital have wider walls and requiring a litany of tests before abortions.

It's a woman right to choose what she does with her body NOT THE GOPs right!

GOP Against Women Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a republican
> and republicans don't want abortions to be legal.
>
> If republicans put more legislation on the books
> to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including
> making hospital have wider walls and requiring a
> litany of tests before abortions.
>
> It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> her body NOT THE GOPs right!

Stay vigilant, my friend, and vote for Democratic Party candidates.

GOP Against Women Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a republican
> and republicans don't want abortions to be legal.
>
> If republicans put more legislation on the books
> to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including
> making hospital have wider walls and requiring a
> litany of tests before abortions.
>
> It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> her body NOT THE GOPs right!


We all know that Dems don't really give a shit about it other than as a political issue to be used to manipulate braindead parrots like you.

The Most Interesting Man In FFX Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GOP Against Women Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a
> republican
> > and republicans don't want abortions to be
> legal.
> >
> > If republicans put more legislation on the
> books
> > to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including
> > making hospital have wider walls and requiring
> a
> > litany of tests before abortions.
> >
> > It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> > her body NOT THE GOPs right!
>
> Stay vigilant, my friend, and vote for Democratic
> Party candidates.


You sound as stupid as someone who worked in the Carter Administration.

Polly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> GOP Against Women Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a
> republican
> > and republicans don't want abortions to be
> legal.
> >
> > If republicans put more legislation on the
> books
> > to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including
> > making hospital have wider walls and requiring
> a
> > litany of tests before abortions.
> >
> > It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> > her body NOT THE GOPs right!
>
>
> We all know that Dems don't really give a shit
> about it other than as a political issue to be
> used to manipulate braindead parrots like you.


We all know that Contards don't give a shit about babies because they cut funding any chance they get that would help

Don't care Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Polly Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > GOP Against Women Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a
> > republican
> > > and republicans don't want abortions to be
> > legal.
> > >
> > > If republicans put more legislation on the
> > books
> > > to prevent abortions they'll do it.
> Including
> > > making hospital have wider walls and
> requiring
> > a
> > > litany of tests before abortions.
> > >
> > > It's a woman right to choose what she does
> with
> > > her body NOT THE GOPs right!
> >
> >
> > We all know that Dems don't really give a shit
> > about it other than as a political issue to be
> > used to manipulate braindead parrots like you.
>
>
> We all know that Contards don't give a shit about
> babies because they cut funding any chance they
> get that would help

The only objection I have is taxpayer funded abortions for those who
are sexually irresponsible. Birth control is affordable in case you
haven't noticed. Don't waste your keystrokes by putting up quotes from
and idiot like Sandra Fluke.

Don't care Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Polly Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > GOP Against Women Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a
> > republican
> > > and republicans don't want abortions to be
> > legal.
> > >
> > > If republicans put more legislation on the
> > books
> > > to prevent abortions they'll do it.
> Including
> > > making hospital have wider walls and
> requiring
> > a
> > > litany of tests before abortions.
> > >
> > > It's a woman right to choose what she does
> with
> > > her body NOT THE GOPs right!
> >
> >
> > We all know that Dems don't really give a shit
> > about it other than as a political issue to be
> > used to manipulate braindead parrots like you.
>
>
> We all know that Contards don't give a shit about
> babies because they cut funding any chance they
> get that would help


Foist is a liar and you're a chump for buying into the bs.

.
Attachments:

Most libs are pathological liars. They'll spew any lie that they think will help get them elected. What's most pathetic is that their braindead zombie lib voters will believe every bit of their garbage.

Polly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We all know that Dems don't really give a shit
> about it other than as a political issue to be
> used to manipulate braindead parrots like you.

Fuck off with that worthless bullshit, you stinking piece of right-wing fundie trash Many of us have had friends and family deal with the sad dilemma of an unwanted pregnancy. You know who should decide what's best for a woman in that situation? The woman herself, that's who. Not some low-grade, fucked up, god-smacked stinking fucktard like you.

IVoteGOP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The only objection I have is taxpayer funded
> abortions for those who are sexually irresponsible.

How many "taxpayer-funded abortions" are you aware of? The actual number is a few dozen a year at most, all of them through Medicaid for indigent women facing serious life and health issues.

Bottom line Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Foist is a liar and you're a chump for buying into the bs.

Has Barbara The Bitch ever stated that she thought Roe v Wade should be overturned? Hmmm, assfuck? Has THAT ever happened?

Moron Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
Yes, she HAS said that. But you see, right wingers believe that they know better how to spend their hard-earned money than some bureaucrat in Washington, but they believe bureaucrats in Washington know more about whether you should have a baby than you do. This really is how completely fucking stupid they are.

Fousts ad claims that she does not want an exception for rape or incest. That is not true.

Typical trained seal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> IVoteGOP Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The only objection I have is taxpayer funded
> > abortions for those who are sexually
> irresponsible.
>
> How many "taxpayer-funded abortions" are you aware
> of? The actual number is a few dozen a year at
> most, all of them through Medicaid for indigent
> women facing serious life and health issues.

I'm fully aware of the Hyde Amendment and the restrictions under Obamacare
and hope they stay in place. However, if the Dems had their way almost
all abortions would be "free".

Notice where is says the Hyde Amendment is not permanent.
(neither is Obamacare) :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyde_Amendment

Lying Libs Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Most libs are pathological liars. They'll spew
> any lie that they think will help get them
> elected. What's most pathetic is that their
> braindead zombie lib voters will believe every bit
> of their garbage.

You people are just PATHOLOGICALLY STUPID...

Tell us what a good idea Tax Cuts for the Rich were.
Tell us how much better off we are for not having done stem cell research.
Tell us how we went to Afghanistan and wiped out the Taliban forever.
Tell us how mandates for standardized testing have improved public schools.
Tell us how many WMDs Iraq had.
Tell us how much yellow cake Saddam tried to buy in Niger.
Tell us what "Mission Accomplished" means.
Tell us what you saw when you gazed into Putin's soul.
Tell us what a great job Brownie did.
Tell us what a stand-up guy Alberto Gonzales was.
Tell us again how the fundamentals of the economy were strong.
Tell us who tracked down and smoked out Osama bin Laden.

Let's face it -- you morons have never been right about anything. Wall-to-wall stupid is all you bring to the table. Completely useless assfucks.

Foust ad Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Fousts ad claims that she does not want an
> exception for rape or incest. That is not true.

How can you grant an exception once Roe v Wade is gone? The Hateful Bitch has very plainly stated her belief that Roe v Wade should be overturned. She has also worked for years to smear women's advocates and to defeat and limit women's rights. She is an abusive fundie right-wing Koch-bot.

IVoteGOP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm fully aware of the Hyde Amendment and the
> restrictions under Obamacare
> and hope they stay in place. However, if the Dems
> had their way almost all abortions would be "free".

So, you knew full well that there are actually only tiny handfuls of taxpayer-funded abortions but thought you would rile people up with the notion anyway. You can just suck my dick, you piece-of-shit dishonest fucktard.

> Notice where is says the Hyde Amendment is not
> permanent.

Nothing is permanent, asshole. Except perhaps your putrid, disgusting, sub-human nature.

Don't worry libtardz, nobody's going to take away your right to kill little nigger babies by the millions.

Likewise contardz, nobody's going to take away your guns.

Now we can all move on to more substantive issues.

Clowns to left, jokers to right Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't worry libtardz, nobody's going to take away
> your right to kill little nigger babies by the
> millions.

Republican women have the right to determine their own reproductive histories as well. They can't be ordered to bear a child and can't be prevented from it either. See how that works? Right-wing fundie asshole dumbfucks like Barbara Comstock do not.

> Likewise contardz, nobody's going to take away
> your guns.

Big difference. No one is trying to do that. It would be nice though if people could face up to the responsibilities that come with gun ownership, realizing for example that a guns means one thing in Wyoming (7 people per square mile) and another thing in Manhattan (70,000 people per square mile). Let's see some laws that respect the different needs those different circumstances bring about.

Miserable disgrace and failure Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Lying Libs Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Most libs are pathological liars. They'll spew
> > any lie that they think will help get them
> > elected. What's most pathetic is that their
> > braindead zombie lib voters will believe every
> bit
> > of their garbage.
>
> You people are just PATHOLOGICALLY STUPID...
>
> Tell us what a good idea Tax Cuts for the Rich
> were.

Every taxpayer received a tax cut. Not just the rich. But you never got that talking point delivered to your inbox. Also, didn't the current occupant of the White House extend these cuts???

> Tell us how much better off we are for not having
> done stem cell research.

When did we not do stem cell research? You don't do any of your own research, do you? You just believe the bullshit that is fed to you. When did you acquire your taste for shit? No federal law ever did ban stem cell research in the United States. None.

> Tell us how we went to Afghanistan and wiped out
> the Taliban forever.

They aren't in charge. Wars don't end with the snap of the fingers. Only a childish simpleton thinks differently.

> Tell us how mandates for standardized testing have
> improved public schools.

Are you talking about NCLB? The bill that was introduced and championed by none other than Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA)?

> Tell us how many WMDs Iraq had.

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

Yes, tell us.....

> Tell us how much yellow cake Saddam tried to buy
> in Niger.

In June 1999, a businessman, approached Prime Minister Ibrahim Mayaki nd insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Niger and Iraq. Mayaki interpreted 'expanding commercial relations' to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales.

That is according to Joe Wilson.

> Tell us what a stand-up guy Alberto Gonzales was.

Compared to the current occupant of that office, Gonzales is a gem of a human being.

"When did we not do stem cell research? You don't do any of your own research, do you? You just believe the bullshit that is fed to you. When did you acquire your taste for shit? No federal law ever did ban stem cell research in the United States. None."

Too cute by half. And immature. George Bush banned Federal funding for stem cell research in 2001, with the exception of a very limited number of existing inferior cell lines. In addition, a number of goober states implemented their own bans. That effectively killed stem cell research. Why do you people always twist facts to suit your perspective? Sad, really.

IVoteGOP Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Don't care Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Polly Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > GOP Against Women Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> >
>lp
>
> The only objection I have is taxpayer funded
> abortions for those who
> are sexually irresponsible. Birth control is
> affordable in case you
> haven't noticed. Don't waste your keystrokes by
> putting up quotes from
> and idiot like Sandra Fluke.

There have been no Medicare funded abortions since like the mid 1970's with the Hyde Ammendment.

Oh, Please Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "When did we not do stem cell research? You don't
> do any of your own research, do you? You just
> believe the bullshit that is fed to you. When did
> you acquire your taste for shit? No federal law
> ever did ban stem cell research in the United
> States. None."
>
> Too cute by half. And immature. George Bush banned
> Federal funding for stem cell research in 2001,
> with the exception of a very limited number of
> existing inferior cell lines. In addition, a
> number of goober states implemented their own
> bans. That effectively killed stem cell research.
> Why do you people always twist facts to suit your
> perspective? Sad, really.


Wrong. The only limitation was on Federal funding for research using hES (embryonic) derived lines beyond a set of 70 existing standard cultures.

Also, since stem cell research now has advanced well beyond the limitations inherent in embryonic lines, it obviously did not 'kill stem cell research.' In fact, whether intended or not, one could argue that it pushed it in a beneficial direction.

I'll tell you Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Every taxpayer received a tax cut. Not just the rich.

Yes, moron, Bush about DOUBLED the number of people who pay no income taxes at all. But what they and asswipe low-brow suckers such as yourself actually got was a measly few hundred dollars. The wealthy meanwhile got five figures, not just to start with, but year after year after year. The tax cuts as a whole shifted income and purchasing power away from the lower and middle classes and into the hands of the upper classes. This is to INVITE low and negative growth, as the rich spend more slowly than anyone else. Big surprise economic activity stalled, causing the Fed to freeze interest rates at 9/11 levels, directly leading to the Wall Street crime wave that brought on the Great Recession. Assfucks are of course clueless as to all this.

> Also, didn't the current occupant of the White House
> extend these cuts???

He postponed eliminating them for the top two brackets -- first because of the economic collapse that assfuck Republicans had managed to engineer, and later as a ransom payment in a blackmail scheme that assfuck Republicans were running with people they had forced into unemployment being the pawns held hostage. Republicans are just hate-the-poor, anti-social fucktards. Once the recovery had ventured (despite Republican efforts to halt it) onto the fringes of self-sustainability, the tax cuts for the rich were done away with. It was a token event however. Much more "revenue enhancement" than that will need to be done, but it will come as part of a comprehensive tax reform package to be signed by President Clinton.

> When did we not do stem cell research? You don't
> do any of your own research, do you?

Moron. Limiting conditions and the limited and deteriorating cell lines available in the US forced researchers in droves to move offshore. It was as devastating as Reagan's ending energy tax credits had been to the then-emerging US solar industry. Do you know nothing at all, you colossal dumbfuck?

> They aren't in charge. Wars don't end with the
> snap of the fingers. Only a childish simpleton
> thinks differently.

You're a COMPLETE IDIOT. Here are the facts. The US military routed the Taliban. They were either dead or on the run in other countries. A sensible post-war policy would have kept it that way. But Soldier-Boy Bush insisted on turning a resounding victory into abject defeat by pulling up stakes and running off to Iraq just because he didn't like Saddam Hussein. And given the complete lack of any effective planning for that debacle, it quickly turned into exactly the disastrous Vietnam-like quagmire that knowledgeable people had predicted from the outset. One dramatic win traded for two ignominious defeats. That's the deal that fucktard Bush and the Republicans pulled off. Be proud, be very proud, asshole.

> Are you talking about NCLB? The bill that was
> introduced and championed by none other than Sen.
> Ted Kennedy (D-MA)?

No, the reckless, unfunded, and ineffectual NCLB mandates that the cretin George W Bush and his assorted assfuck Bill Bennett stooges passed into law. The one that plagues us still because Republicans asstards can't manage to admit how thoroughly disastrous the plan has been, still refusing to allow the complete overhaul and redesign that the Education Act so desperately needs. Screw schools, screw kids. It's much more important that dumbfuck Republicans save face re one -- but just one -- of their grand array of miserable and devastating failures.

> Yes, tell us.....

Okay. THERE WERE NO WMDs in Iraq at all. Everything Bush ever said about them was a lie, and he knew it at the time. Bald-faced liar. He lied to the people. He lied to Congress. He lied to everyone. Just as you do. The First Gulf War was ended by an agreement between Iraq and the UN Security Council. It states that the Security Council remains seized of the matter. The US had NO AUTHORITY to invade. There was also NO REASON to, as Hans Blix was in the process of demonstarting. Blix of course was not at all a good thing for Bush, who proceeded in haste to send improperly equipped troops into harms way where hundreds of them were maimed and killed as the direct result. No big deal if you are a Republican assfuck.

> Tell us how much yellow cake Saddam tried to
> buy in Niger.

The correct answer is none, shit-for-brains. The CIA had told Bush that the supposed documentation appeared to be forged prior to a foreign policy speech in Cincinnati in October 2002. He took the "yellow cake" lies out of that speech, but put them back in for the State of the Union in January 2003. The "sixteen words" were all false, as everyone but the most ignorantly resistant lying assfucks now knows.

> Compared to the current occupant of that office,
> Gonzales is a gem of a human being.

No, he was and still is a deplorably dishonest douchebag, hack, and political sleaze -- a disgrace to the nation and to his species. Which is TOADY (toadus intolerabus). The saddest part is he was only one of many. Just as one would expect from a Republican administration.

Why did that fucking clown tell us we could "keep our insurance policies if we like them"?


My policy went up almost $1,000 a year AND my deductible went up by almost 33%.



Just because Bush sucked doesn't mean we have to let Obama suck too!

idontlikebeingrightaboutshitlikethisbutiam



Edited 21 time(s). Last edit at 5/31/1967 05:57AM by WingNut.

Last edit at 11/30/2015 01:37PM Last edit at 5/14/2015 03:52PM Last edit at 1/28/2014 05:57AM Last edit at 11/29/2015 01:10PM Last edit at 3/14/2011 11:52PM Last edit at 7/20/2012 04:07AM
Last edit at 6/29/2013 11:18PM Last edit at 3/19/2011 01:02PM Last edit at 3/26/2012 09:07PM

wk3HT Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Oh, Please Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > "When did we not do stem cell research? You
> don't
> > do any of your own research, do you? You just
> > believe the bullshit that is fed to you. When
> did
> > you acquire your taste for shit? No federal law
> > ever did ban stem cell research in the United
> > States. None."
> >
> > Too cute by half. And immature. George Bush
> banned
> > Federal funding for stem cell research in 2001,
> > with the exception of a very limited number of
> > existing inferior cell lines. In addition, a
> > number of goober states implemented their own
> > bans. That effectively killed stem cell
> research.
> > Why do you people always twist facts to suit
> your
> > perspective? Sad, really.
>
>
> Wrong. The only limitation was on Federal funding
> for research using hES (embryonic) derived lines
> beyond a set of 70 existing standard cultures.

That's what I said, moron. And only 21 of the 70 cell lines offered viable research opportunities. Don't be disingenuous - serious research requires large amounts of Federal funding.

> Also, since stem cell research now has advanced
> well beyond the limitations inherent in embryonic
> lines, it obviously did not 'kill stem cell
> research.'

It effectively killed it at the time - as I said - at least in this country. Progress continued to be made in other countries, in part by US researchers who moved overseas. Obama reversed Bush's ridiculous politically motivated ban in 2009, thereby allowing scientific research to proceed in one of the most wealthy and advanced countries in the world.

> In fact, whether intended or not, one
> could argue that it pushed it in a beneficial
> direction.

What an asinine statement. That's like the Nazis saying that yes, we killed millions of Jews, but we made great strides in population control.

"And immature. George Bush
banned
Federal funding for stem cell research in 2001"

Nope. But hey, you're butthurt, so there's that.

Wrong again... Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "And immature. George Bush
> banned
> Federal funding for stem cell research in 2001"
>
> Nope. But hey, you're butthurt, so there's that.

You forgot this part...

"with the exception of a very limited number of existing inferior cell lines."

I know it's hard, but try not to be an ignorant asshole.

GOP Against Women Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look we all know Barbara Comstock is a republican
> and republicans don't want abortions to be legal.
>
> If republicans put more legislation on the books
> to prevent abortions they'll do it. Including
> making hospital have wider walls and requiring a
> litany of tests before abortions.
>
> It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> her body NOT THE GOPs right!


Why doesn't the about to be murdered child have a say in it? Or would that be inconvenient?

Someone said earlier that there is no such thing as an "unborn baby." Have you ever heard a pregnant woman say that her kicking fetus kept her up all night?

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why did that fucking clown tell us we could "keep
> our insurance policies if we like them"?

Because it was true in its original context. There are no death panels in PPACA, there are no government takeovers, and there is no requirement that anyone give up a plan they liked and switch to a different one. That of course does not mean that carriers cannot decide on their own to terminate plans that they feel will be unprofitable under terms of the law. This is especially the case among the 5-7% of policies that exist in the individual market, and moreso among those who were carrying thin one-year coverage that barely qualified as coverage at all. Being underinsured is very nearly as bad as being uninsured, and the law plainly intends to cut drastically into both numbers. Some 15-20% of those grandfathered nonconforming plans were dropped by carriers each year once PPACA was passed. Individuals meanwhile had four years worth of notice that the number was going to go to 100%. Due to whining, an extra year's grace was added, and they still act like they're all surprised. They have only themselves and their one-time carriers to blame.

At the same time, I'd agree that the administration should have restated rather than repeated the original assurance. It's entirely true in the main, but has enough seeming contradictions at the extremes for propagandists to whip up a firestorm over. It rarely pays to believe that those people will behave with any integrity, and they haven't.

> My policy went up almost $1,000 a year AND my
> deductible went up by almost 33%.

Not for the same coverage. But lets' be clear -- if you were one of those free-loader wannabes trying to skate by with a low premium, low coverage policy, secure in the knowledge that if anything bad ever happened, you'd get the care you needed at somebody else's expense, then the party is fucking over. You actually deserved to be cut by PPACA a lot more deeply than you were.

> Just because Bush sucked doesn't mean we have to
> let Obama suck too!

Just because Bush was an asshole doesn't mean you should be one too. PPACA was desperately needed. It's far from perfect. It will be tailored and modified over the years, just as Social Security has been. It was the best bill that could have been passed. It gives us a plan and a framework to work from. Focus on stupid-shit side issues is a game for worthless goobers.

Lincoln St Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why doesn't the about to be murdered child have a
> say in it? Or would that be inconvenient?

Do you ask fetuses for advice about the stock market as well? What an asshole. 90% of abortions are done in the first 12 weeks. A fetus at that time is the size of a peanut and it does not have even the primitive precursors of an intellectual capacity. Those circuits are not laid down until well into the third trimester. The construction and testing of these systems is not completed until well after birth. Doofus.

question for Foust Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Someone said earlier that there is no such thing
> as an "unborn baby." Have you ever heard a
> pregnant woman say that her kicking fetus kept her
> up all night?

Grow up. Start by learning the distinction between precise scientific language and irregular goober vernacular. There are no unborn babies. There are only confused and deluded people who use the term when what they mean is zygote, blastocyst, embryo, or fetus.

GOP Against Women Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's a woman right to choose what she does with
> her body NOT THE GOPs right!


The trouble with your statement is that the woman is also choosing what she does with the body of ANOTHER person (i.e., the unborn baby).

And the unborn baby IS another person. It's DNA is separate and distinguishable from the mother's DNA, as well as from the father's DNA. And, since only living beings produce DNA, that makes the unborn baby a living being. Furthermore, since only humans produce human DNA, the unborn baby is a living HUMAN being.

Thus, terminating the pregnancy of an unborn baby is the termination of a life.

Now, clearly, no one advocates forcing the victim of rape or incest to bare the child of such an event, but that unborn child is still innocent. But, a hardness of heart insists that we, as a society, make that exception.

Given that pregnancies arising from rape or incest constitute an exceedingly small percentage of the overall number of abortions, it goes to show just how amoral the Democrat Party is for basically carrying the water of the modern-day Liliths that inhabit NARAL.

Sad, truly sad, how liberals and Democrats (primarily) are so casual with the lives of those they deem "inconvenient." It's almost as though they deem the unborn babies as lives unworthy of life. Gee, where has the world heard that line before?

WingNut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why did that fucking clown tell us we could "keep
> our insurance policies if we like them"?
>
>
> My policy went up almost $1,000 a year AND my
> deductible went up by almost 33%.
>
> src=http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/file.p
> hp?40,file=140273,filename=obama-laughs.jpg>
>
> Just because Bush sucked doesn't mean we have to
> let Obama suck too!


That sounds made up and no one believes you. Plus, you are stupid, as proven by your political rants.

Something like this:
Attachments: