The Democratic War on Women

[Clocker]

This has to be a GOP lie, right?

Rep. Tammy Duckworth of Illinois, who is expecting a baby in December, is being denied a request to vote by proxy in the House Democratic Caucus leadership and committee member elections next week—even though her doctor advises she can't travel to Washington in the late stages of her pregnancy.

The Iraq War veteran, who lost both legs when her helicopter was shot down in 2004, made the request in a letter to fellow Democrats. Her letter was read during a closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting on Thursday. But objections were raised, and the request was denied, with opponents including Democratic Steering and Police Committee cochair Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.

Full story (http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/dems-won-t-lift-ban-on-proxy-voting-for-duckworth-20141113)

[jballscalls]

this is more a war on woman not women. disgusting nonetheless

[Saratoga_Mike]

this is more a war on woman not women. disgusting nonetheless

Why - does the policy only apply to Ms. Duckworth?

[jballscalls]

Why - does the policy only apply to Ms. Duckworth?

I was referring to this instance

[Robert Goren]

I did not read anywhere she moving to the "woman friendly" GOP caucus.

[Saratoga_Mike]

I did not read anywhere she moving to the "woman friendly" GOP caucus.

I think Boehner would have accommodated her

[OntheRail]

Nancy don't what her there as Duchworth... would be casting a ney votes for some of her comity nominees. The party for women's right... huh.

[Clocker]

The party for women's right... huh.

As long as they do what they are told by their betters.

[davew]

Nancy don't what her there as Duchworth... would be casting a ney votes for some of her comity nominees. The party for women's right... huh.


The Democratic Party neverending fight for the common good -> themselves..

[Clocker]

The Democratic Party neverending fight for the common good -> themselves..

It's a common sense rule. She has to vote in person because she needs to show her I.D. :p

[Tom]

If you are Black, or a women, and a democrat.......sorry, you are an idiot.

[Robert Goren]

I think Boehner would have accommodated herThe tea party would not like another from a commie to a RINO in their midst. :)

[reckless]

The tea party would not like another from a commie to a RINO in their midst. :)

Conservatives have consistently shown you and others that the real War On Women is a regular left wing Democrat Party modus operandi.

Yet, whenever you and your ilk are shown true, current left wing Democrat Party War on Women examples, you belch out 'tea party'. What gives, Robert?

[Robert Goren]

Conservatives have consistently shown you and others that the real War On Women is a regular left wing Democrat Party modus operandi.

Yet, whenever you and your ilk are shown true, current left wing Democrat Party War on Women examples, you belch out 'tea party'. What gives, Robert?You can say all you want about it, but it was not the liberal democrats who sided with Hobby Lobby. When I start seeing a lot pro-choice republicans on the ballot, I will believe that republicans have changed. It is the republicans who have a war on women. Until the GOP gets it through their heads that a women's body is her to control and that of some Holy-Than-Thou pro lifer, it is them that will be waging a war on women. When the GOP gets its into their heads that a woman's sex life is her business and hers alone, then it can stop trying to defend itself against charges that it is waging a war on women. Your and other conservative's contrived arguments are not going to change anything. A real change of some core beliefs is needed on the part of the GOP and conservatives.

[Tom]

Yet, whenever you and your ilk are shown true, current left wing Democrat Party War on Women examples, you belch out 'tea party'. What gives, Robert?

Pride and ignorance, a dangerous combination.
What else but ignorance could explain a stupid comment like this one?

It is the republicans who have a war on women.

[reckless]

You can say all you want about it, but it was not the liberal democrats who sided with Hobby Lobby. When I start seeing a lot pro-choice republicans on the ballot, I will believe that republicans have changed. It is the republicans who have a war on women. Until the GOP gets it through their heads that a women's body is her to control and that of some Holy-Than-Thou pro lifer, it is them that will be waging a war on women.

You lefties still won't understand the Hobby Lobby lawsuit and decision. Ignore facts and delude yourself all you want.

When the GOP gets its into their heads that a woman's sex life is her business and hers alone, then it can stop trying to defend itself against charges that it is waging a war on women.

You demand that the GOP needs to undertand that a women's body is her own, and her business alone... but yet, you want the government, especially conservatives and the GOP, to pay for abortions and contraceptives. Hobby Lobby did not want to be forced by the government to pay for an immoral, granted legal, act such as an abortion. They were already paying for their female employees health insurance but objected to the contraception benefit. Why was that? Because the taking of the 'Morning after Pill' is a de facto abortion in their eyes.

Conservatives simply don't want to pay for abortions and contraceptions -- some don't for moral reasons; some don't for economic reasons -- because we feel it's wrong for a government entity to stick their heads in the private lives of women, just as you insist the GOP should do.

This Democrats' and the liberals' standard War on Women argument is nothing more than a ruse and red hearing.

[Clocker]

You can say all you want about it, but it was not the liberal democrats who sided with Hobby Lobby.

No one sided with Hobby Lobby. People that believe in real freedom of choice sided with the principle that the owners of Hobby Lobby should not be forced by the government to violate their morals and religious beliefs. Freedom of religion is in the Constitution. Free medicine is not.

The owners of Hobby Lobby were not attempting to force their beliefs on their employees. Not wanting to pay for something is a lot different than preventing someone else from paying for it. How many Hobby Lobby employees do you think having been paying for their own birth control for years without whining about their human rights?

I'm shocked that the left hasn't tried to make Chick-fil-a stay open on Sunday. Surely that is a blatant effort of the owners to force their religion on their employees.

[Robert Goren]

You lefties still won't understand the Hobby Lobby lawsuit and decision. Ignore facts and delude yourself all you want.



You demand that the GOP needs to undertand that a women's body is her own, and her business alone... but yet, you want the government, especially conservatives and the GOP, to pay for abortions and contraceptives. Hobby Lobby did not want to be forced by the government to pay for an immoral, granted legal, act such as an abortion. They were already paying for their female employees health insurance but objected to the contraception benefit. Why was that? Because the taking of the 'Morning after Pill' is a de facto abortion in their eyes.

Conservatives simply don't want to pay for abortions and contraceptions -- some don't for moral reasons; some don't for economic reasons -- because we feel it's wrong for a government entity to stick their heads in the private lives of women, just as you insist the GOP should do.

This Democrats' and the liberals' standard War on Women argument is nothing more than a ruse and red hearing.You sound just like a Muslim. You can find a thousand reason to stick your nose into a woman's business. All that matters is you think you know better than a woman how she should run her personal affairs. You think your morality should apply to her. That is bottom line. And then you wonder why women don't vote the same as you.

[Clocker]

You think your morality should apply to her.

Mormons are opposed to alcohol. If a Mormon business owner has a Christmas party for his employees and does not serve alcohol, is he imposing his morals on them?

[incoming]

The proper question to ask....Why does the LEFT have a war on babies, the most helpless, unprotected and the easiest human to lie too.

ANSWER: They don't have a vote, which makes it a very easy sacrifice, for some.

[Clocker]

The proper question to ask....Why does the LEFT have a war on babies

And on religious beliefs that they disagree with.

[Robert Goren]

No one sided with Hobby Lobby. People that believe in real freedom of choice sided with the principle that the owners of Hobby Lobby should not be forced by the government to violate their morals and religious beliefs. Freedom of religion is in the Constitution. Free medicine is not.

The owners of Hobby Lobby were not attempting to force their beliefs on their employees. Not wanting to pay for something is a lot different than preventing someone else from paying for it. How many Hobby Lobby employees do you think having been paying for their own birth control for years without whining about their human rights?

I'm shocked that the left hasn't tried to make Chick-fil-a stay open on Sunday. Surely that is a blatant effort of the owners to force their religion on their employees. . The Hobby Lobby case shows that conservatives think the rights of some of the owners of a corporation trump the rights of its women employees. I and most democrats disagree. You went so far as to say in this case that the women don't even have any rights to employer paid birth control if the corporation does want to offer it. What next? The corporation can refuse to hire women unless they wear a burka? It really is the same thing. Only a conservative can not see that.

[Tom]

A corporation can not go to Heaven or Hell.

Bobby, those are YOUR personal beliefs. Not everyone believes in Heaven of Hell. Yet here, you are, trying to force YOUR beliefs on everyone. shame, shame.
Hypocrite!

BTW, America REJECTED the war on woman - deal with it. Your key issue is so far down the list you and it don't count for anything.

But, hang onto the idea as the world passes you by.
You will make 2016 much easier if you miss the boat again. :lol:

[Clocker]

Corporations do not have a religion. If you incorporate you gain certain advantages, but you give up certain things. Only the pervert logic of the Roberts court thinks that a corporation is the same as person. A corporation can not go to Heaven or Hell.

The Court didn't say that a corporation is a person. They said that a corporation is an assembly of people, and people don't give up their rights when they assemble for legal purposes.


If you ever employed people, you would know that making an employee work on their Day of Worship can be tricky business.

You don't make people work on their day of worship. You tell them up front what the job entails. They then have freedom of choice to take the job or not.

[Robert Goren]

Mormons are opposed to alcohol. If a Mormon business owner has a Christmas party for his employees and does not serve alcohol, is he imposing his morals on them? No, but if he refuse to hire somebody who drinks alcohol, he is.

[Robert Goren]

The Court didn't say that a corporation is a person. They said that a corporation is an assembly of people, and people don't give up their rights when they assemble for legal purposes.



You don't make people work on their day of worship. You tell them up front what the job entails. They then have freedom of choice to take the job or not.Actually the Roberts court has said that in a different case. In second case, you are not an employer or you would know that is not the law.

[Clocker]

No, but if he refuse to hire somebody who drinks alcohol, he is.

That has absolutely no bearing on this discussion.

So you say that it is alright for an employer to refuse to buy alcohol because he is opposed to it on religious grounds, but it is not alright to refuse to buy birth control for the same reason.

How does an employer not paying for birth control infringing on the rights of a woman to use it? Not paying for alcohol does not infringe on the rights of an employee to drink, does it?

[Clocker]

In second case, you are not an employer or you would know that is not the law.

Are you saying that I cannot tell a job applicant what the required work schedule will be? If I tell an applicant that the work week is Wed. through Sun., I cannot refuse to hire a person who says he won't work on Sunday?

[Tom]

Actually the Roberts court has said that in a different case. In second case, you are not an employer or you would know that is not the law.
You are so far off base here - give it up, Bobby.

[TJDave]

From a numbers standpoint women voters hold a growing majority and have for the last 30 years. That they are underrepresented is by choice.

[Saratoga_Mike]

. The Hobby Lobby case shows that conservatives think the rights of some of the owners of a corporation trump the rights of its women employees. I and most democrats disagree. You went so far as to say in this case that the women don't even have any rights to employer paid birth control if the corporation does want to offer it. What next? The corporation can refuse to hire women unless they wear a burka? It really is the same thing. Only a conservative can not see that.

Sadly I don't see a future for you teaching constitutional law - the Hobby Lobby ruling does NOT apply to corporations. Justice Alito, writing for the majority, specifically said the ruling applied to "closely held" for-profit corporations run on religious principles. I guess only a conservative can read an opinion and not conflate it into something it is not.

[OntheRail]

Bobby no ones stopping you from send a monthly check to your favorite pill pushing abortion clinic. But to demand the rest of Society to pony up... is BS.

And claiming that because many don't want to pay for it... is to be denying women access to them is more BS.

If Sandra can send $50 to $100 for shoes and twice that on a dress and $12 on a mojito while waiting for Booby to pick up the next three... before heading for a roll in the hay. She can spare $15 for the pill.


I think I've figured out why we've had such wild weather as of late... it's all that liberal spin... it's causing havoc with the upper level winds. :lol:

[JustRalph]

From a numbers standpoint women voters hold a growing majority and have for the last 30 years. That they are underrepresented is by choice.

Good point. Btw, Abortion Barbie (Wendy Davis ) lost with women here in Texas by a large margin. Infuriating the left. You can't refer to the vote of women as a monolithic movement or predict their vote based on any one issue.

[reckless]

You sound just like a Muslim. You can find a thousand reason to stick your nose into a woman's business. All that matters is you think you know better than a woman how she should run her personal affairs. You think your morality should apply to her. That is bottom line. And then you wonder why women don't vote the same as you.

I don't know nor care how a woman runs her personal life ... but when left wing pansies demand that I accept abortion plus pay for it, and also demand that I accept a woman's lifestyle plus pay for it, then who exactly is sticking their nose and beliefs where it doesn't belong?

[Tom]

I think liberals grossly underestimate women.
They are not one issue floozies who will vote for anyone willing to throw a condom at them.

The view of women held by the left is deplorable, but expected. The same way they hold Blacks in contempt. The condom issue and the scare tactics of Ferguson did not work - America saw through it and rejected it soundly.
May I say that again? It sounds so good.....America REJECTED the liberals outright. :lol: :lol: :lol:

So onward, we have work to do.
It is time to Bury Barry.

[Clocker]

Sadly I don't see a future for you teaching constitutional law

Does that mean that he is qualified to run for president on the Democratic ticket?

[NJ Stinks]

I think liberals grossly underestimate women.
They are not one issue floozies who will vote for anyone willing to throw a condom at them.



You're right, Tom. Women look at all the issues and then vote Democratic time and again. :cool:


From Gallup.com:

June 12, 2009

Women More Likely to Be Democrats, Regardless of Age

Women from 18 to 85 are more Democratic than men of the same age

by Frank Newport

PRINCETON, NJ -- A new Gallup analysis of almost 150,000 interviews conducted from January through May of this year sheds new light on the substantial gender gap that exists in American politics today. Not only are women significantly more likely than men to identify as Democrats, and less likely to identify as independents, but -- with only slight variation -- this gap is evident across all ages, from 18 to 85, and within all major racial, ethnic, and marital-status segments of society.

Link: http://www.gallup.com/poll/120839/women-likely-democrats-regardless-age.aspx

[Clocker]

women...less likely to identify as independents

And God knows we don't need any independent thought in the political process. :rolleyes:

[TJDave]

Spouses tend to vote like their spouses. This does not necessarily mean that wives vote like their husbands. It can just as easily be the other way round. ;)

[Clocker]

Spouses tend to vote like their spouses. This does not necessarily mean that wives vote like their husbands. It can just as easily be the other way round. ;)

Which provides no additional insight into the behavior of low information voters. :rolleyes:

[TJDave]

Which provides no additional insight into the behavior of low information voters. :rolleyes:

My friend, only those privileged to attend late night bourbon and branch caucuses are high information.

The rest of us are the lowest of the low.

[Robert Goren]

Are you saying that I cannot tell a job applicant what the required work schedule will be? If I tell an applicant that the work week is Wed. through Sun.,I cannot refuse to hire a person who says he won't work on Sunday? Yes, according to the law of the land. I personal do not agree with that law, but it is still the law. If you ever get into hiring and firing employees, you find there are things a lot different than you thought. The days of saying you are hired and fired on the spot ended about 30 years ago.

[Robert Goren]

I think liberals grossly underestimate women.
They are not one issue floozies who will vote for anyone willing to throw a condom at them.

The view of women held by the left is deplorable, but expected. The same way they hold Blacks in contempt. The condom issue and the scare tactics of Ferguson did not work - America saw through it and rejected it soundly.
May I say that again? It sounds so good.....America REJECTED the liberals outright. :lol: :lol: :lol:

So onward, we have work to do.
It is time to Bury Barry. My guess is that you won't even be able put up another mile of chain link fence along the Arizona border. Conservatives by their very nature are all talk and no action. It is a good thing that talk is cheap, because the right is doing a lot of bragging right now and little else.

[Robert Goren]

Which provides no additional insight into the behavior of low information voters. :rolleyes:Definition of a low information voter; One who voted the opposite way you would have voted if you would have had the time to go vote. :rolleyes:

[Clocker]

Yes, according to the law of the land. I personal do not agree with that law, but it is still the law. If you ever get into hiring and firing employees, you find there are things a lot different than you thought. The days of saying you are hired and fired on the spot ended about 30 years ago.

I have hired and fired people, and a lot more recently than 30 years ago. And there is no law I have ever heard of, federal, state, or local, that says that I can't set the work schedule before hiring someone. I would certainly like to see a source for such a law.

[Tom]

You're right, Tom. Women look at all the issues and then vote Democratic time and again.

Where were they a couple of weeks ago? :lol::lol::lol:

When America REJECTED the liberals.

[Tom]

My guess is that you won't even be able put up another mile of chain link fence along the Arizona border. Conservatives by their very nature are all talk and no action. It is a good thing that talk is cheap, because the right is doing a lot of bragging right now and little else.

What does that have to do with my post?
You trying to change the subject again? :lol:

[Clocker]

I have hired and fired people, and a lot more recently than 30 years ago. And there is no law I have ever heard of, federal, state, or local, that says that I can't set the work schedule before hiring someone. I would certainly like to see a source for such a law.

I checked on this, and the law says that you have to accommodate the religious beliefs unless it is a hardship for the business. If I need someone to work on Sunday, if I have to hire someone that won't work on Sunday, then I have to hire another person who will work on Sunday? That's a hardship on my business.

What about a union shop where days off are determined by seniority? Some new guy is going to come in and get weekends off? Don't think so. It is a law without teeth, written to give everyone a warm and fuzzy feeling.

[reckless]

The left wing big media continues its war on women, this time in the real world of CNN.

Women, please note: if you work for a left leaning company such as CNN, please don't get in a family way. You will probably lose your position or your job.

http://pge.sx/1tUfc4b

[HUSKER55]

My guess is that you won't even be able put up another mile of chain link fence along the Arizona border. Conservatives by their very nature are all talk and no action. It is a good thing that talk is cheap, because the right is doing a lot of bragging right now and little else.


and what have democrats done.....