Abortion supporter: There is nothing, NOTHING to like about Paul Ryan
With so much focus on Ryan’s fiscal austerity (except when it comes to tax cuts for the rich), his extreme position on women’s reproductive rights has faded into the background.
Like almost all House Republicans, he has voted in lockstep with his party to deny women access to safe abortion care, contraception, breast exams, and other critical preventive care; repeal the Affordable Care Act; and de-fund Planned Parenthood.
~ Robin Marty, criticizing Republican Vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan’s voting record, RH Reality Check, August 9
[Graphic via sadiemagazine.com]
Aug.13, 2012 6:00 am |
Campaign |
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
If Robin is this miffed Romney obviously made the right pick.
At least he’s a good-looking Vermin.
My husband calls him “Pretty Boy”.
It looks like pro-lifers have been called up to the plate.. It looks like there is lots for pro-lifers to do and that we need to continue to organize and make the sure GOTV is strong for the Republicans
unrelated point: The Republicans have to expose the Democrats recent centrist spin that the Democrats are the only political party looking out for the middle class as the hollow rhetoric that it is.
“If Robin is this miffed Romney obviously made the right pick. “
Tyler, you beat me to it!
It seems that all the appropriate people have expressed their outrage at the Ryan pick. It’s a good sign.
God has surely smiled on Wisconsin with its hallowed triumvirate: Ryan, Walker and Priebus!!!
I lovew it when the proaborts get all riled up! Here’s hint, abortion lovers: Ryan is no vermin, and neither are the unborn children you so cavalierly dispose of.
Ryan is denying women access to contraceptives? Wow, he must be really busy standing guard outside of every grocery store, pharmacy and gas station, waving women away from the condom aisle. No wonder he’s so fit- that’s a lot of arm waving and football tackling for one guy!
Oh, and he’s keeping women away from breast exams, too! Apparently, he’s got every health care provider in the US locked up in his basement! He really has been busy!
I don’t know how he’s going to find the time or energy to campaign. I think I’ll make a hefty donation so he can hire someone to stand in his spot outside the local Walgreens.
;o)
his [Paul Ryan’s] opposition to feministas demand NOT to reproduce biologically, after the fact, has faded into the background.
he [Paul Ryan] has voted conistently to pro-tect prenatal childrne, repeal the ; and wean pp from the federal teat.
Still waiting for the down side.
Strip away the hyperbole, and they’re all fine recommendations in my book. Translate: limit and regulate abortion access; no free contraception; defund PP; repeal ObamaCare. I’m over the moon and total energized! R&R2012!
I’d love to hear Ryan draw together the fiscal argument with the pro-life argument and show how the number of abortions has adversely impacted our entire nation. He could do this with better clarity than almost anyone else. And Obama would hate it.
We have a definitive choice between an administration that absolutely (and demonstrably) hates children and families and one who clearly loves children and families.
Of course Obama/Biden death team cheerleaders are so focused on themselves, their short-sightedness won’t reveal the long term risks.
I heard Jim Braude on WTKK this morning, and he was suggesting most senior citizens will guard their benefits at the expense of crushing future generations. I really believe that if Romney/Ryan articulated the choice we’re facing, most people would make the wise decision, and look out for posterity. That said, I’m not under any delusions that this will be an easy task.
I’m really surprised at the quotes the article used from him. They are eloquent, thoughtful, and in-context. Surely they didn’t mean to give him such accurate and powerful moments in that article?
Alice, I suspect when people’s morals are so inverted, they see truth, goodness and beauty as their precise opposites.
C. S. Lewis explored this in a couple settings in his last Narnia book. Lifting from a source I quickly found just now:
Aslan approaches the dwarfs who are huddled in their darkness and he growls. They think it is someone in the stables trying to frighten them. Then Aslan shakes his mane and sets before the dwarfs a magnificent feast of food. The dwarfs grab the food in the darkness, greedily consuming it, but they cannot taste its goodness. One thinks he is eating hay, another an old rotten turnip. In a moment, they are fighting and quarreling among themselves as usual. Aslan turns and leaves them in their misery.
They children are dismayed. Even the great Aslan cannot bring them out of their self-imposed darkness. “They will not let us help them,” says Aslan. Their prison is only in their minds and they are so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out….”
“They will not let us help them,” says Aslan. Their prison is only in their minds and they are so afraid of being taken in that they cannot be taken out….”
I’m not fond of Romney and I don’t know about this guy, but Ryan;s wife is an attorney, an heiress, and a stay at home mom, and she’s getting flack from it. I guess it’s okay to be rich when you’re a Dem (the Kerrys, Kennedys, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer) but when you’re a Republican, it’s a no-no. What a double standard!
Being from WI makes me a tad biased.
Ryan is awesome but please don’t take my word for it! :)
Research what he stands for and what he has done.
100% prolife voting record!!
I wish we could pull up the enthusiastic comments from four years ago when Palin was picked and everyone (but me) was saying what a great day it was and how McCain was now on a path to victory.
We have a definitive choice between an administration that absolutely (and demonstrably) hates children and families and one who clearly loves children and families.
This is an unfair statement to make. Being pro-choice does not mean that Barack Obama hates children or families. I understand the root of this thinking; I understand that if you’re pro-life, it is hard to see how supporting legalized abortion is pro-family. But: the broader implications in such statements are that pro-choice men and women don’t love their children or even the idea of children, which is untrue. This is the equivalent of pro-choice advocates arguing that it is impossible to be both pro-life and pro-women’s rights. One’s opinion on legalized abortion may or may not be indicative of his or her feelings toward families or women, but one cannot say with honesty that “so-and-so hates families/women because I don’t like his stance on abortion.”
When we take this idea and stretch it out to its logical conclusions, we are characterizing the world as divided between good and evil people. Why is Obama pro-choice? Why, he’s evil and hates families and children! Why is Mitt Romney pro-life? Why, he’s evil and hates women! My side is good and the other side is evil! My enemy is motivated by evil!
It’s crude, sloppy thinking and is demonstrably false.
Hal: “I wish we could pull up the enthusiastic comments from four years ago when Palin was picked and everyone (but me) was saying what a great day it was and how McCain was now on a path to victory.”
Why? Four years ago Obama supporters were talking about “what a great day it was and how Obama was on a path to victory” – and they were right.
How one talks has no ominous connection with past disconnects between talk and results.
Nothin’ says love like a search and destroy mission. I agree, abortion advocates do love their children. They love them to death.
rasqual. The “why”is because, like Senator McCain, Governor Romney had to make a “game change” decision to try to stay alive in this race. High risk/high reward, and all that. He’s in trouble, as he should be. No real reason to vote for Romney over Obama, and most of our citizens know that. Going hard right to please the base pleases me, as it increases the chance for Obama’s re-election. Four years ago, I said something similar, and many here scoffed at the idea. We all live in our bubbles. In my bubble, Obama is very popular and Romney is not a serious candidate.
Too bad the VP isn’t much more than campaign candy…
And once in office, the VP isn’t much more than Oval Office spokesperson.
“One’s opinion on legalized abortion may or may not be indicative of his or her feelings toward families or women, but one cannot say with honesty that “so-and-so hates families/women because I don’t like his stance on abortion.”
Honesty? Have you forgotten what website you’re on? Here’s a rule of thumb when dealing with people in this movement: assume they are lying unless it can be proven otherwise.
But Libertybelle, remember that the VP has the potential to become the POTUS someday.
We have a definitive choice between an administration that absolutely (and demonstrably) hates children and families and one who clearly loves children and families.
Um, no. We have a choice between an administration that is for abortion and an administration that might, maybe, possibly, could potentially do a few pro-life things. Obama doesn’t hate his family. And just because Romney loves his wife and kids doesn’t mean he’ll be a good president. Remember Bush? Yeah, he was “pro-life” too and had control of Congress. But he still funneled tax dollars to Planned Parenthood and failed to do anything of substance for families or the unborn.
Besides, I don’t know what the liberals are all up in arms about – Romney (and even some of Ryan’s) truthful-honest-to-goodness policy decisions are basically on par with liberal ideology.
SO what we really have here is : ROBOMNEY-BYAN ’12! haha
Phillymiss, yeah, but so do Senators and Congressman and Governors.
My point is that no matter who Romney picks, his VP doesn’t make Romney any better in my eyes.
I agree, abortion advocates do love their children. They love them to death.
Great bumper sticker idea:
Planned Parenthood Loves Children to Death
Then why do you come here week after week after week after week, Joan?
Hal, you enjoy yourself until November then. Just hit the snooze alarm, no reason to get out and rock the vote, eh?
“Being pro-choice does not mean that Barack Obama hates children or families.”
Dear Vannah (and Joan) – we believe Barack Obama hates children because he is so obsessed with preventing children that he is willing to stomp on Catholic employers and institutions to force them to underwrite contraception, abortifacients and sterilization. That so many people agree with President Obama is chilling.
Ninek, don’t worry, I’m rocking the vote and sending my money. Not taking any chances of going backwards, must move forward. ;)
Hal, I understand you are turned off by Ryan but which of the following three characteristics do you find to be the most despicable?
Being fiscally responsible. Being pro-life. Or wanting less government and more freedom.
Hey Hal, I’m not scoffing. $100 on Romney. Take the bet or you’re a poseur.
Payment via Dwolla when the time comes.
“Not taking any chances of going backwards, must move forward.”
Right. Because “going forward” always means “doing whatever progressives want to do in coming years.” Automatically. The term “forward” somehow happens to mean that. Automagically!
Fine. I’m going to arbitrarily select stupid versus intelligent for conservatism. You’re obliged — automagically! — to acknowledge that it’s semiotically binding on you. “Not taking any chances of going stupid, must move intelligently!”
:-/
I have no idea why progressives are so intent on saying utterly contentless, meaningless, gratuitous gibberish.
LibertyBelle: “And once in office, the VP isn’t much more than Oval Office spokesperson.”
Yeah — except in the case of the Current Occupant. He certainly doesn’t want Joe speaking for the administration.
He leaves genius Carney for that. LOL
Dear Vannah (and Joan) – we believe Barack Obama hates children because he is so obsessed with preventing children that he is willing to stomp on Catholic employers and institutions to force them to underwrite contraception, abortifacients and sterilization. That so many people agree with President Obama is chilling.
Firstly, no one is obsessed with preventing children. Birth control has benefits outside of pregnancy prevention. I support these measures to cover birth control and I don’t hate children or want to see anyone stomped. To pretend as though Obama’s world revolves around abortion is to engage in hysterics. His Administration has been defined by the economy, healthcare reform, and foreign policy; it has comparatively little to do with social issues.
Second, how are Romney and Ryan more pro-child? They don’t support the middle and lower classes. They serve Wall Street. The entire GOP economic model revolves around screwing over the middle and working classes to benefit the rich because they “create jobs,” but where are these jobs? Is he more pro-family for standing against gay adoption and gay marriage in case those gays try to destroy families by creating one of their own? Please, explain to me how Ryan’s apparent stance against birth control coverage is supposed to negate his economic policies working against us down here in the Third Estate. And then there’s Romney, who gives his blessing to Israel to bomb the oil out of Iran. How many children do you think die every year in war?
Are you really willing to ignore all of these things because these men don’t agree with underwriting birth control (but will likely not do much more to get rid of abortion than any other Republican White House)?
“Second, how are Romney and Ryan more pro-child? They don’t support the middle and lower classes. They serve Wall Street.”
LOL
Geez the cliche stuff in these parts. Learn a bit about how economies work. Read some Friedman. Read some Hayek. Heck, read some Heinlein.
Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.”
And pay more attention to how President Goldman Sachs has fixed the bank problem, or reformed the government’s relationship with Wall Street (hint: he ain’t done jack — they’re still “too big to fail,” the Fed still hands ’em cash, and all the while Obama hires their lobbyists to work his campaign). LOL
Go forward (or “lean forward” as MSNBC says) with Obama if you like, Hal. But some of us are smarter than the average lemming.
Hal says: August 13, 2012 at 3:37 pm “I wish we could pull up the enthusiastic comments from four years ago when Palin was picked and everyone (but me) was saying what a great day it was and how McCain was now on a path to victory.”
HAL,
I have to credit you for being righ….once in a row.
But I also have to correct you.
You weren’t the only obamaphile here who was claiming satisfaction at McCain’s choice for VP.
And there is a high probability that you were right….but for the wrong reasons.
Rasqual, LOL the fact that Obama uses Carney to speak for him instead of Biden is quite telling that Obama must not have the most intelligent people surrounding him. Haha I listen to Carney speak and every single time he says something that makes go *facepalm* But when Biden speaks… Oh man. I can’t wait for the debates between him and Ryan! I mean, to be quite honest, Biden makes Bush look eloquent. ;)
Ninek, don’t worry, I’m rocking the vote and sending my money. Not taking any chances of going backwards, must move forward.
Honey child, I’m afraid you’re turned around – what you think is forward is really backward. ;) (I’m messing with you, Hal. I just couldn’t resist since you threw that trite use of forward out. NO offense, but it’s just as meaningless and transient as “hope” and “change”)
I heard Jim Braude on WTKK this morning, and he was suggesting most senior citizens will guard their benefits at the expense of crushing future generations. I really believe that if Romney/Ryan articulated the choice we’re facing, most people would make the wise decision, and look out for posterity. That said, I’m not under any delusion that this will be an easy task.
I hear you, Chris. I received my “Important Message from the National Education Association” today reminding me how I will be standing up for educators with my vote for BHO because he supports “Healthier Children and Stronger Starts.”
The propaganda reads in part that Obama, “kept class sizes small by making education his top domestic priority.”
The NEA forgot to mention how Obama is keeping class sizes small is all.
LibertyBelle: Bush/Biden — Except on matters Bush well understood. A president can’t be ready on a moment’s notice to answer every possible question put to him, but on occasions when Bush was asked something about something he was intimately acquainted with, he was utterly amazing — as good as Ryan in the “pwns Obama at the White House” video. He was, indeed, no public speaker. But in dialog with reporters directly on matters, he could be remarkable. That’s contrary to some popular myths about Bush, but thus are facts.
Actually, the way Bush could be spot-on but be popularly seen as a doof reminds me a bit of an old SNL skit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go-FoUrn63Q
Rasqual, yeah, I think Bush got more flack than was due him. The public memory is harsh and remembers only gaffes. :) Bush did mess up quite a bit, and for non-Southerners, his Texan accent may have been off-putting for the less genteel parts of the country. (Personally, I love the Southern accent. Wish I had one, darnit).
SNL!!!! Can’t wait to watch it after work!!!
Anyway, point taken. Sarah Palin is also often characterized as a doof, but she can be eloquent on occasion.
Biden, though…. Oh, Biden. ;)
I see Hal isn’t interested in putting $100 on his man for the election.
Apparently not a true believer.
That’s excellent.
Hope more Obama “supporters” are as doubtful.