So, how come we're not talking about Komen vs Planned parenthood?

[amarante]

I don't even understand how the Republicans feel that this kind of extremism is helpful to anyone but their extreme base.

National elections - and I would suspect many state elections - are won or lost based on votes of independent voters. I can't imagine a war against contraception is in line with their beliefs.

While they might not be wild in their sexual behavior, most probably have sex with NO desire to have children or the risk and probably don't assume their adult children are celibate.

I don't get it - the Democrats have a base but they don't seem to pander to it in the extreme way that the Republicans do. For better or worse, Clinton and now Obama govern from the center.

[Meganator]

I don't even understand how the Republicans feel that this kind of extremism is helpful to anyone but their extreme base.

National elections - and I would suspect many state elections - are won or lost based on votes of independent voters. I can't imagine a war against contraception is in line with their beliefs.

While they might not be wild in their sexual behavior, most probably have sex with NO desire to have children or the risk and probably don't assume their adult children are celibate.

I don't get it - the Democrats have a base but they don't seem to pander to it in the extreme way that the Republicans do. For better or worse, Clinton and now Obama govern from the center.

I don't think Republicans are anti-birth control. And Catholics, I think, tend to be more Dem than Rep. I think Republicans are - in general - against the gov't mandate, and the birth control issue is where they're planting their flag. I'm not saying it's right, just clarifying...

[amarante]

I don't think Republicans are anti-birth control. And Catholics, I think, tend to be more Dem than Rep. I think Republicans are - in general - against the gov't mandate, and the birth control issue is where they're planting their flag. I'm not saying it's right, just clarifying...

I disagree in terms of the campaigns of the Presidential candidates who have all come out in favor of the "personhood" amendment.

I'm not sure how one can be against viewing birth control as a basic component of health care and still be in favor of birth control. To me, it's all pandering to a minority who doesn't support birth control.

Of course not all "Republicans" are against birth control but it's the pandering to the base that is driving the party over the cliff.

[Meganator]

I disagree in terms of the campaigns of the Presidential candidates who have all come out in favor of the "personhood" amendment.

I'm not sure how one can be against viewing birth control as a basic component of health care and still be in favor of birth control. To me, it's all pandering to a minority who doesn't support birth control.

Of course not all "Republicans" are against birth control but it's the pandering to the base that is driving the party over the cliff.

The personhood arguments are with respect to abortion. I don't think there are many mainstream Republicans who are actually against standard birth control - such as pills, which I assume to be the most common form. The new law does also require offering of the morning-after pill, which may be a point of contention for a wider group than just the Catholics.

[leebee]

The personhood arguments are with respect to abortion. I don't think there are many mainstream Republicans who are actually against standard birth control - such as pills, which I assume to be the most common form. The new law does also require offering of the morning-after pill, which may be a point of contention for a wider group than just the Catholics.

Gingrich has come out against "post-conception birth control" which could easily include birth control pills even when used as intended because they can stop a fertilized egg from implanting. Santorum opposes any birth control a la the Catholic doctrine. Romney has been cagey--relatively silent on birth control, railing against the very things he supported as governor, and going after Obama for the birth control proposal as an attack on religion--he could go whichever way the wind blows him. This is a troubling trend to me, and I am furious at the way the discussion has gone, largely without imput from someone who maybe has a personal stake in the issue.

[Gumbeaux]

This annoys the crap out of me - apparently the House is holding a hearing regarding the contraception mandate. The Republican controlled committee only allowed male witnesses.

"According to Think Progress, Issa had argued that the hearing was about religious liberty, not reproductive rights--hence no female witnesses."

Why aren't women knowledgeable about religious liberty?

[Meganator]

Gingrich has come out against "post-conception birth control" which could easily include birth control pills even when used as intended because they can stop a fertilized egg from implanting. Santorum opposes any birth control a la the Catholic doctrine. Romney has been cagey--relatively silent on birth control, railing against the very things he supported as governor, and going after Obama for the birth control proposal as an attack on religion--he could go whichever way the wind blows him. This is a troubling trend to me, and I am furious at the way the discussion has gone, largely without imput from someone who maybe has a personal stake in the issue.

Yes, the pill can act as post-conception birth control; but I still would wager that his statements were not intended to include the pill. Yes, that would make his statements inconsistent - and so he would never use anything but waffle-words about the issue - but unless he really doesn't care about alienating a huge portion of his potential voters, he can't seriously endorse that. I would wager that a huge proportion of all but the most militant anti-abortion supporters use birth control pills or IUDs. Being against abortion is a relatively mainstream point of view; being against birth control isn't.

[tbb113]

I think Republicans are - in general - against the gov't mandate, and the birth control issue is where they're planting their flag. I'm not saying it's right, just clarifying...

IMHO its a stupid place to plant a flag. I can't believe this is the issue they need to run on.

Then again, since the economy is improving, jobs are being created, people are feeling better about it all, what else do they have

[amarante]

I honestly believe that the far right is populated by a lot of people who really are trying to push their agenda which is that any sexual act other than the missionary position between two married heterosexuals (married to each other) which might result in a baby is wrong.

I think if they were able to push back the country to some time when women who had sex faced the fear of pregnancy they would.

I am not amused by this joke because I think it represents their true belief system.

Foster Friess, the biggest donor to the super PAC supporting Rick Santorum, suggested women used aspirin as a contraceptive.

"Back in my days, they used Bayer aspirin for contraceptives," Friess said in an MSNBC interview today. "The gals put it between their knees and it wasn't that costly

[leebee]

Yes, the pill can act as post-conception birth control; but I still would wager that his statements were not intended to include the pill. Yes, that would make his statements inconsistent - and so he would never use anything but waffle-words about the issue - but unless he really doesn't care about alienating a huge portion of his potential voters, he can't seriously endorse that. I would wager that a huge proportion of all but the most militant anti-abortion supporters use birth control pills or IUDs. Being against abortion is a relatively mainstream point of view; being against birth control isn't.

But more & more Gingrich is towing the Catholic line. It doesn't matter what people are doing privately: the Catholic Church opposes all "artificial" forms of birth control. Santorum is certainly right there. I think Gingrich's ego will convince him that he is SO right, the country will follow. I don't trust for a moment that cooler heads will prevail. The more they listen to themselves, the more reasonable it will all sound. Look where we are now--is it really a stretch that they'll try to take it a few steps further?

[luv2cook]

I didn't read all 4 pages of this thread but just wanted to say that I think that people should make choices that are right for them - and not be dictacted to based on religious or personal belief nor should they be judged. i have always been about choices and I think I always will be....

[charley]

And just when you think it can't get nastier than it already is (see the last few posts about Blunt, etc.), have you heard the bill that's quickly making its way through Virginia? This is already passed by their House. They're trying to push through the "personhood" bill stating that life begins at conception. This is similar to a bill that was defeated in Mississippi just a few months ago (Mississippi has more sense than Virginia???)


What is going on in this country?

Hold on to your hats ...

It passed the Senate in Oklahoma.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/...wpisrc=nextbox

[oct2189]

I didn't read all 4 pages of this thread but just wanted to say that I think that people should make choices that are right for them - and not be dictacted to based on religious or personal belief nor should they be judged. i have always been about choices and I think I always will be....

Totally agree.
At the risk of being blasted, why does everyone continue to ignore Ron Paul as a candidate?

[zwieback]

Hold on to your hats ...

It passed the Senate in Oklahoma.

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2012/...wpisrc=nextbox

I want to know, if life begins at conception, why doesn't this life get a social security number at the time the mother finds out she is pregnant?! Shouldn't the mother be able to claim the life as a dependent on her income taxes?

[syzygy]

I want to know, if life begins at conception, why doesn't this life get a social security number at the time the mother finds out she is pregnant?! Shouldn't the mother be able to claim the life as a dependent on her income taxes?

Well, since the bill provides embryos and fetuses with “all the rights privileges, and immunities” of other citizens, I don't see why she couldn't, or shouldn't.

Won't that be fun!

[amarante]

Levity

[Valerie226]

Hilarious!!

Every time I think people can't possibly get any crazier... they do!!

[SDMomChef]

Well, since the bill provides embryos and fetuses with “all the rights privileges, and immunities” of other citizens, I don't see why she couldn't, or shouldn't.

Won't that be fun!

Hmmm....so if an embryo has been frozen for 18 years, does that mean it can register to vote too?

[jjsooner73]

Ugh. Yes, my home state is once again making headlines...it's shameful.

[Meganator]

But more & more Gingrich is towing the Catholic line. It doesn't matter what people are doing privately: the Catholic Church opposes all "artificial" forms of birth control. Santorum is certainly right there. I think Gingrich's ego will convince him that he is SO right, the country will follow. I don't trust for a moment that cooler heads will prevail. The more they listen to themselves, the more reasonable it will all sound. Look where we are now--is it really a stretch that they'll try to take it a few steps further?

It'a s frightening hypothetical, but I don't feel that it will actually amount to anything because I don't think any one of them is a strong enough candidate to beat Obama. I think there is a large middle ground of conservatives who are not as religious, not as militantly pro-choice, etc. who don't make news but who don't agree with the extreme positions being taken by the candidates, such as the anti-birth control issues. At a minimum, it will just result in a lower voter turnout for the Republicans.

[amarante]

It'a s frightening hypothetical, but I don't feel that it will actually amount to anything because I don't think any one of them is a strong enough candidate to beat Obama. I think there is a large middle ground of conservatives who are not as religious, not as militantly pro-choice, etc. who don't make news but who don't agree with the extreme positions being taken by the candidates, such as the anti-birth control issues. At a minimum, it will just result in a lower voter turnout for the Republicans.

Interesting analysis of the demographics of the Republican primary voter - it is such a small number of people and totally unrepresentative of American in 2012.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com...land/?emc=eta1

The positions taken by the candidates are so extreme that they seem to have helped Obama in the latest polls especially among the critical suburban *independent vote*.

Santorum has come out against public schools most recently.

[RiverFarm]

Interesting article, Amarante. One does wonder how it will all shake out in the general election. Apparently to win a Republican primary one has to espouse extremely radical views; once the candidate is chosen he has to move to the center in hopes of engaging the more moderate R's and the independents. That will be hard to do after this circus.

[amarante]

Interesting article, Amarante. One does wonder how it will all shake out in the general election. Apparently to win a Republican primary one has to espouse extremely radical views; once the candidate is chosen he has to move to the center in hopes of engaging the more moderate R's and the independents. That will be hard to do after this circus.

I don't know how a candidate walks himself back from this kind of thing.

Was it Kerry who got the image of flip flopping?

I don't think Santorum is "pandering" to the base as I think he is stating his positions - for better or worse on the social stuff. He appears to be a total hypocrite on stuff like earmarks and that article posted above on his wife's lawsuit was certainly in the category of you can't make this stuff up.

Romney is pandering I think on the social issues but his background on economic issues is not going to endear him to the majority of people who wouldn't be hurt by a tax on those making over $250,000 a year. It will be interesting to see how it goes in Michigan which has a blue collar population but an extremely hard to core right to life contingent.

ETA - Santorum seems to be doubling down on what health insurance should provide as he thinks prenatal testing should be excluded because it results in abortions.

[jjsooner73]

ETA - Santorum seems to be doubling down on what health insurance should provide as he thinks prenatal testing should be excluded because it results in abortions.

He gets scarier and scarier.

[Valerie226]

amarante, thanks so much for the link to the NYT article above.

[daisylover]

Just when I thought the craziness had hit its peak, I saw this on the news this morning:

Indiana Lawmaker: Girl Scouts in League with Planned Parenthood

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/22/electi...ml?eref=rss_us

[donleyk]

Just when I thought the craziness had hit its peak, I saw this on the news this morning:

Indiana Lawmaker: Girl Scouts in League with Planned Parenthood

http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/22/electi...ml?eref=rss_us

This bothers me on so many levels. What a wingnut. And he doesn't have an argument. He would not give an example of his criticism. When he finally did, he said he did research on the internet. BWAHAhhahahahaha. What? What credible source on the internet?

[daisylover]

When he finally did, he said he did research on the internet. BWAHAhhahahahaha. What? What credible source on the internet?

Funny, this was my reaction exactly!