John Mccain and Sarah Palin hate women, Rachel Maddow comments
January 23rd, 2010 | by admin |
We all know John McCain and Sarah Palin are out of touch on women’s health; between McCain’s infamous air-quoting of the word “health” and Palin’s countless contradictions on reproductive health care, we know that we would be in bad shape if they were to make it to the White House. That is no big news.
But what Sarah Palin told the American public last week was a stark confirmation of where they stand.
During an interview that Focus on the Family founder and anti-choice leader James Dobson conducted with Palin, he brought up the Republican Party platform’s position on choice, identifying it — in his own words — as, “the strongest pro-life, pro-family document to come out of a political party.” [The Republican platform seeks a constitutional amendment banning all abortions -- with no exceptions for rape and incest, and no exception to save the life of the woman.] To me, that’s not pro-family — that’s pro-government in women’s lives.
Not only did Palin express her support for the platform’s principles, but when she was asked if McCain also “strongly supports those views” and whether she believes he will “implement it,” she responded, “I do, from the bottom of my heart.”
With that statement, Palin affirmed our fears that she, along with John McCain, is on board with the platform’s most severe anti-woman principles. Apparently women’s health is not only “extreme,” but it’s not even up for discussion.
If McCain upholds the Republican Party platform while in office, where will this leave the teenager who is impregnated as a result of rape? Where will this leave the woman who might die if she doesn’t receive abortion services? Shouldn’t these women have the right to make these personal decisions about their health, about their lives?
Regarding the principles of the Republican Party platform, Palin said: “[T]hey are there, they are solid, we stand on them and again I believe that it is the right agenda for the country at this time. Very, very clear and contrasted tickets in this election, November 4th.”
That last sentence is the one thing Sarah Palin and I can agree on. And there are only eight days left to go. Governor Sarah Palin is assuring Americans that a McCain/Palin administration will implement the very harshest of anti-woman policies — meaning no choices, and no exceptions. Next week when you’re at the polls, use your vote wisely; don’t put the government in control of women’s health and lives.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cecile-richards/palin-and-mccains-disrega_b_138557.html
Duration : 0:10:15
[youtube n5zzCp_ax-s]
25 Responses to “John Mccain and Sarah Palin hate women, Rachel Maddow comments”
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
I point out our …
I point out our oblgation to love each other, but I am fully aware that many people fall short and fail to do this.
By goldgrif on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
yep, let’s see …
yep, let’s see christains killing women in the name of god, the native peoples, yep forcing children to not speak their natiev tongue, killing people that dont agree, bombing houses, yep, allota love their
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
You mean “her” …
You mean “her” children? Many women love their children and value them as people. They don’t see it as reproducing “the” children “for men”. Your view seems somewhat jaded.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
prolifers care …
prolifers care about women. Half of the aborted babies are female. Many prolife people want to protect the children. Unfortunately, only women can get pregnant.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
It’s not all about …
It’s not all about women’s reproductive choices. It’s also about protecting the child’s rights. There are always at least 3 people involved.
Legal and illegal abortions both result in the loss of the child.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Desires are natural …
Desires are natural. Yes, we may, and often do, choose to act on them. I would never tell someone sex is unnatural. By definition, it is natural. As far as being sinful, that is something you and your partner must decide for yourselves. You will only suffer guilt if you believe it to be wrong in spite of what I might or might not say. However, there are always consequences, especially when you involve multiple partners.
By burningeko on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
i agree that …
i agree that abstinence is the best way to not get pregnant.
unfortunately abstinence programs don’t work, all they do is cause guilt and confusion to people who have natural desires.
sex is the most fun and satisfying things that you can do with another human being (or 2 if you are lucky).
trying to make people think that something they do naturally is unnatural and sinful you are causing people to suffer.
teaching people to do things responsibly is the way to go.contraception=less stds etc
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
There is nothing …
There is nothing more important to a christian than life, especially the life of innocents. Our first obligation is to love each other as we love God.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Why not just say …
Why not just say the baby should be old enough to feed itself? Or walk? Or vote?
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
There are waiting …
There are waiting lists for adopting babies–white babies anyway.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Even a few cells …
Even a few cells are “life” so technically, at conception.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Abstinence is the …
Abstinence is the best way not to get pregnant. Contraception is no guarantee.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Doctors take an …
Doctors take an oath to “first do no harm”. Aborting a healthy fetus for no medical reason runs counter to this oath and puts physicians in a moral and professional dilemna.
By Mikevdog on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Lesbians for …
Lesbians for Republicans!
By IronEagle1225 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
lol.
lol.
By Potatopetes on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Yay! Obama won …
Yay! Obama won presidency! Healthcare is actually an issue, where it’s obvious that women’s “healthcare” is not a concern to McCain
By Facebook289 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
that shouldnt be …
that shouldnt be the law. Thats unconstitutional and should be repealed
By Facebook289 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
did you just …
did you just compare Abortion to Slavery? Wow something is seriously wrong with you.
By satinbarbi on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
They both are owned …
They both are owned by the same people to keep us distracted.
By radioactivenews on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
The Supreme court …
The Supreme court also allowed slavery. And that too was the law of the land. Was the Supreme Court right in allowing slavery to continue simply because it was the law? Nope! It was wrong everyday it was practiced as law.
Got to love the lib heads… “It’s sounds cruel!” Hey! Try being on the other end of a late term abortion! Cruel doesn’t begin to describe it you sad soul!
By salinagrrrl69 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Ahhh Sean Hannity’s …
Ahhh Sean Hannity’s EVIL twin brother Racheal MAD-ow. S’he should shove a stainless steel implement into the base of s’his viable -outside the womb- skull…and late term s’himself.
By tube2a on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Wow, can you say …
Wow, can you say quote mining? Typical media bull tactics.
By kdurston1 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
I agree we will …
I agree we will never get the whole story, Because of views like yours. the press is to challenge and question the authorities, whether Political, religious or economic. but instead we get this from the main stream media. And it is possible to give fair coverage. i do it all the time. in fact i present views i detest as strongly as i can so i might understand them better. I’m Canadian, watch CBC News & see what i’m talking about. It’s far more balanced than US. We never see diatribes like this.
By purplefuzzythings on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
Oh, shouldn’t this …
Oh, shouldn’t this and shouldn’t that. Stop being so indignant.
We are greedy and cruel by nature, and people like Rupert Murdoch are always going to mess up your “no bias” idealism no matter what. Besides, it’s just human nature to be partially biased to some extent.
Yes, the world sucks. Yes you should have all the news. But it ain’t gonna happen. Remember when Bush was stovepiping information to the NY Times? Everyone believed that info. You will never get the whole story.
By kdurston1 on Jan 23, 2010 | Reply
you’ve missed the …
you’ve missed the point. journalism is supposed to be unbiased. if it is not, then it is a special interest organ like Iskra and Provda in the USSR. it can still be technically called news, but we know it is nothing more than a propaganda device for the special interest group. i’m not supporting Fox news either as it suffers from the same defects. we shouldn’t have to watch two separate channels to get reasonable, and fair, representation of the issues.