October
7th 2010
Dems to women: it’ll be different this time, baby, we promise!

Posted under: American history, bad language, Gender, local news, the body, women's history

More beating up on the majority of the Democratic party by abusive Democratic pols:  “Democrats in Tight Races put Focus on Abortion Rights,” again in The New York Times,with a photo of our U.S. “Senator” Michael Bennet talking to actual XX chromosome people as the poster boy for desperate Dems.  Dig this–if we stay home, under-vote, or vote Republican, we’ll ZOMG “lose control of our bodies!!1!!!1!”

In the bruising race for a Senate seat here in Colorado, one ad features a Denver obstetrician in her scrubs, saying women will lose control of their bodies if Ken Buck, the Republican nominee, wins. Another, from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, says privacy is at stake with a Buck victory over Senator Michael Bennet, a Democrat.

The Buck campaign has said the attacks are simply an attempt to change the subject.

“The No. 1 issues are jobs and the economy, and Michael Bennet can’t run on that,” said Owen Loftus, a spokesman for the Buck campaign. “It’s a desperate effort by a desperate campaign.”

Mr. Loftus said Mr. Buck believed that life begins at conception and opposed abortion even in cases of rape and incest, as the ads say, but that his focus as a senator would be the economy.

Are we not men?

Y’know, it sure would be nice if politicians actually did something about preserving access to abortion before they came to us to ask for our votes so that abortion rights aren’t further eroded.  Bennet’s track record on abortion rights:  non-existent!  Furthermore, abortion isn’t in danger in the U.S. Senate, nor are so-called “pro-choice” Senators like Bennet doing anything to protect abortion rights.  The battle for human rights for women is taking place in state legislatures more than at the federal level anyway, so it’s much more important for pro-choice people to support pro-choice candidates for state offices (state house, senate, and governors).

In any case, Buck’s position is the only intellectually honest and consistent position against reproductive liberty.  If a zygote is a person and a fetus is a baby–an opinion I don’t share, by the way–then the circumstances of its conception are irrelevant.  I’ve always resented that chicken$h!t cop-out language “except in the case of rape or incest.”  Seriously:  anti-choicers should have the courage of their convictions and say they favor outlawing abortion in all cases.  The “rape and incest” exception betrays the slut-shaming that motivates the anti-abortion crowd.

As I’ve written here before, abortion rights is a convenient accelerant for inflaming the political bases of both of the legacy parties in the U.S.  I’m through with setting myself on fire for Democrats who conveniently forget about their pro-choice promises as soon as they take office.  They’re all dead to me.

18 Comments »

18 Responses to “Dems to women: it’ll be different this time, baby, we promise!

  1. Nikki on 07 Oct 2010 at 10:18 am #

    Agreed.

  2. Matt L on 07 Oct 2010 at 10:50 am #

    yup. Those pro-choice convictions sure are scarce when it comes time to actually vote on anything related to abortion and reproductive health.

  3. truffula on 07 Oct 2010 at 11:28 am #

    Some a$$hole on the bus last night was yelling into a cell phone at his “girlfriend” about how he expected to be treated when he got home. He yelled that he shouldn’t have to tell her these things, a girl should just know what a man expects her to do. And she should like it too. The Democratic Party is kinda like that dude.

  4. Historiann on 07 Oct 2010 at 12:57 pm #

    Heh. Now, that’s a man who doesn’t deserve a girlfriend. What a tool.

    MsExPat posted on this story at Corrente this morning, too, FYI, with a much better headline: “Look! Over there! Coathangers!”

  5. Bill on 07 Oct 2010 at 6:54 pm #

    You are correct, Senators don’t have anything to do with abortion. Examples of things Senators don’t do: cast votes on the global gag rule, cast votes on the Hyde amendment, or cast votes on Supreme Court justices. Wait, what? What exactly do you think happens when people like you stay home, the Republicans take the Senate, Obama loses in 2012, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires?

    Nobody is asking you to set yourself on fire. They are asking you to set aside your petulant, Amy Goodman self-righteousness just long enough to go vote.

  6. mandor on 07 Oct 2010 at 7:02 pm #

    Threaten my bodily autonomy some more, Bill! Wheeeee.

  7. truffula on 07 Oct 2010 at 7:41 pm #

    Very convincing, Bill. All I needed was a dude to knock some sense into my head!

  8. LadyProf on 07 Oct 2010 at 7:52 pm #

    Bill, when you say “petulant, Amy Goodman self-righteousness,” are you saying nobody should object to the way Michael Bennet has used abortion rhetoric in his campaign? That it’s all fine, and the amount of criticism this politician should receive is zero? I thought Historiann treated him pretty kindly.

  9. koshem Bos on 08 Oct 2010 at 3:34 am #

    Just because Bill doesn’t have good bed manners doesn’t mean that his diagnosis is wrong. Amy Goodman aside (I don’t like Stalinists either), one shouldn’t ignore the larger picture; you should hold your nose and vote for the smelly skunk to avoid the very upfront and dangerous Republican wolf.

    In Judaism: Pikuach nefesh “saving of human life” is a commandment that, for example, mandates a surgeon to operate on the holy sabbath to save life. It’s a widely practiced commandment. The reason is obvious. To save life you are commanded not to vote for Republicans and I mean it literally.

    2012 is a different matter. I don’t believe the country can afford four more years of the spineless Obama. If he stays, we will have to give our first born to the Banks in addition to our social security earnings.

  10. Historiann on 08 Oct 2010 at 6:59 am #

    Mansplanation 101 by Bill! All women must forget about their “selfish” interests and support Dear Leader and his magical majority that has accomplished nothing on our behalf.

    Heh. Clearly a drive-by swipe, as regular readers know I never “stay home” on election day with my self-righteousness and petulance.

    And koshem Bos: there’s a Green running for the U.S. Senate I didn’t know about until yesterday, so that might be where my vote goes, depending on how Buck is polling.

  11. Perpetua on 08 Oct 2010 at 7:18 am #

    I think Bill’s comment sums up the Dems’ attitudes towards women beautifully: condescending, sexist, and infantalizing. And that’s from the party that’s on our side! I feel inspired to vote already! I’m sure there’s a fantastic Blue Dog candidate who voted for the Hyde amendment running for re-election in my district. Maybe said candidate wants to join our “Women for Lower Pay” party.

  12. Historiann on 08 Oct 2010 at 7:19 am #

    Ha! Good one, Perpetua.

  13. Emma on 08 Oct 2010 at 8:59 am #

    Examples of things Senators don’t do: cast votes on the global gag rule, cast votes on the Hyde amendment, or cast votes on Supreme Court justices.

    Wait, what?? I thought it was a Dem majority Congress that just voted for HCR which expanded application of Hyde.

    Wait, what?? I thought 22 Dems voted FOR John Roberts.

    Also, Senators don’t cast votes on the global gag rule. That’s an executive order. Ooops!

  14. Profane on 08 Oct 2010 at 9:55 am #

    Mansplanatiion @Bill

    Emma just said that you struck out.

  15. Bill on 08 Oct 2010 at 6:20 pm #

    “there’s a Green running for the U.S. Senate I didn’t know about until yesterday, so that might be where my vote goes, depending on how Buck is polling.”

    Wow, you’ll vote for the Green candidate, if the polls indicate a safe lead for the Democrat. You are taking such a profound and convincing stand. Bennett is dead to you, DEAD! His hearts not even beating any more, he’s so dead!(Unless Buck looks strong in the polls.) Why should I take you seriously when you don’t even do so yourself?

  16. Dickens Reader on 08 Oct 2010 at 6:40 pm #

    Oh Bill, shut it.

  17. Historiann on 08 Oct 2010 at 7:10 pm #

    Uh, I mean that if Buck seems like he really needs my vote, I’ll vote for him. If he’s convincingly ahead, I’ll vote for the Green.

    Buh-bye Bill. Thanks for playing. Next time, try reading and lurking a while before you share your awesome wisdom with us.

  18. KC on 12 Oct 2010 at 11:29 am #

    I think this is the way Democrats treat many of their main constituencies: women, gays, blacks, etc. Unfortunately, the current insanity of the GOP means that it really is a “lesser of two evils” type situation for a lot of voters.