Category Archives: War on Women

What Makes Free Birth Control Expensive

Michelle Stansbury

Initially, when my local pharmacy informed me that the nine dollar co-pay on my birth control was now waived, I was surprised. When they went on to ask for my grocery card to give me gas points on the birth control I didn’t pay for, I was appalled. Free birth control and gas points sound picture-perfect, if you ignore the long term ripple effect.

Memorably, Milton Friedman said it best, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.”  If insurance companies are mandated to provide free services at the pharmacy or doctor’s office, they have to bill the recipient later through higher premiums to compensate for the added expense. Sky-high premiums are already expected to take effect for many starting next year; the plan my family and I are on will see a dismal increase of 27 percent.

If you aren’t already seeing a frustrating shade of blue, there are also twenty new tax hikes on families and small businesses scheduled in 2013 and onward courtesy of Obamacare.

Simply put, through increased insurance premiums and taxes, I’ll be paying for my birth control and for those around me several times over when I could have paid a measly nine dollars a month. My budget will tighten because our government and the Sandra Flukes of the world refuse to heed a basic life principal: Nothing is free; no matter how many times the government mandates otherwise.

Michelle Stansbury is a political consultant, paid speaker, and Fox Radio Political Commentator. You can follow her on Twitter: @MBStansbury and Subscribe on Facebook here.

Campaign Ads: Appealing to Women?

This is a case of two very different campaigns. The first, claiming a War on Women, manages to focus on only one issue. Unfortunately, it’s not the issue of jobs, nor is it the issue of respect. No, it is a campaign filled with sexual innuendo (remember Vote With Your Body Parts?), often seemingly aimed at the teen age boy block.

I present to you example one. Please know that this mom found the ad offensive and derogatory. It’s all about instant gratification. They say, it’s the times we live in. I’d like to think otherwise…

The second campaign is much more professional. They offer women in a positive role model, in high ranking jobs who are respected even when they have differing opinions. As you watch this ad you think these are women you’d like your daughter’s to emulate. Strong and effective, working together towards a common goal.

Some might say the campaign is a bit dull. I’d like to think otherwise…

There you have it. Two campaigns looking at women in very different light. What do you think? Your vote on November 6 will let you judge.

Young Women Overwhelmingly Favor Lower Taxes and Less Government Spending to Help Job Creation

Majority of 18-29 year old women favor reduced government spending and tax cuts

Generation Opportunity released new polling data today on young women (18-29) showing they want smaller government and lower taxes.

“Young women don’t want someone who just talks a good game – they want someone who gets the job done. They are sick of empty promises, flashy gimmicks, and meaningless endorsements. Young women are being devastated by this economy and denied opportunities for independence so that they can build a future for themselves. Through no fault of their own, their lives have been placed on hold. They are paying for this administration’s failures personally through the lack of job opportunities. With unemployment for young women far above the already high national unemployment rate, they know the status quo is unacceptable, and they know that we can do better,” said Amber S. Roseboom, Executive Vice President of Generation Opportunity and a former Deputy Chief of Staff of the United States Office of Personnel Management.

“The message to Washington and to candidates from young women is clear – get out of the way – lower taxes and lower federal spending to get this economy moving again. To stubbornly press forward with an agenda that increases taxes and federal spending at the expense of jobs and opportunity is unfair and callous. For those who would arrogantly suggest that women either don’t care about a candidate’s record in office or will simply vote on a narrow band of issues, they had better wake up – women are paying attention, and they plan to vote this November,” Roseboom continued.

According to Generation Opportunity, the non-seasonally adjusted youth unemployment rate for 18-29 year old women in September 2012 was 11.6 percent.

The nationwide survey* was conducted by The Polling Company, inc./WomanTrend for Generation Opportunity  between July 27 and July 31, 2012 and contained a sample of  1,003 young adults ages 18-29.

YOUNG WOMEN ON GROWING JOBS, THE ECONOMY, AND AMERICAN PRIORITIES

  • 77% would decrease federal spending if given the opportunity to set America’s fiscal priorities.
  • 68% of young women agree with the statement “if taxes on business profits were reduced, companies would be more likely to hire.” Only 25% disagree.
  • 61% of agree with the statement “the economy grows best when individuals are allowed to create businesses without government interference.” Only 26% disagree.
  • 69% of 18-29 year old women agree with the statement “if taxes were lowered, the U.S. economy would grow faster.” Only 21% disagree.
  • 66% prefer reducing federal spending over raising taxes on individuals to balance the federal budget.
  • 51% of Millennial women would decrease taxes on individuals if given the opportunity to set America’s fiscal priorities.

YOUNG WOMEN – ON ELECTED LEADERS, POLICIES IN WASHINGTON, AND THE 2012 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

  • 78% of young women plan to vote in the election for President this year.
  • Only 37% believe that today’s political leaders reflect the interests of young Americans.

YOUNG WOMEN – SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM DECISIONS IMPACTED BY THE POOR ECONOMY

  • 90% of 18-29 year old women changed some aspect of their day-to-day lives because of the current state of the economy (Accepted multiple responses) (Randomized):
  • 65% – reduced entertainment budget;
  • 56% – reduced grocery/food budget;
  • 48% – cut back on gifts for friends and family;
  • 43% – skipped a vacation;
  • 40% – driven less/relied more on public transit;
  • 39% – taken active steps to reduce home energy costs;
  • 32% – tried to find an additional job;
  • 27% – changed living situation (moved in with family, taken extra roommates, downgraded apartment or home);
  • 27% – sold personal items or property (cars, electronic appliances, or other possessions);
  • 18% – skipped a wedding, family reunion, or other significant social event;
  • 2% – other, specified;
  • 8% – none of the above (accepted only this response);
  • 2% – do not know/cannot judge (accepted only this response).
  • 84% of Millennial women have delayed or might not do at least one major life event due to the current state of the economy (Accepted multiple responses) (Randomized):
  • 40% – buy my own place;
  • 35% – go back to school/getting more education or training;
  • 31% – pay off student loans or other debt;
  • 29% – change jobs/cities;
  • 28% – start a family;
  • 25% – save for retirement;
  • 22% – get married;
  • 13% – none of the above (accepted only this response);
  • 3% – do not know/cannot judge (accepted only this response).
  • 62% believe the availability of more quality, full-time jobs upon graduation is more important than lower student loan interest rates.
  • 75% believe that the lack of job opportunities is shrinking the American middle class.


*The survey Randomly selected online opt-in panel participants were sent an invitation to the survey via email which included a secure link to the online questionnaire. Quotas were used to ensure the survey was representative of the larger 18-29 year old nationwide population with regard to race, region, and gender. The data were NOT weighted. The overall sampling margin of error for the survey is ±3.1% at a 95% confidence interval, meaning that the data obtained would not differ more than 3.1 percentage points in 95 out of 100 similar samples obtained. Margins of error for subgroups are higher. Women comprised 49% of the total sample for this study.

Romney’s War on Women? Maybe Not.

This morning the Romney Response Team sent out a new ad of women who had worked with Romney.

I was struck by the familiarity of the first woman in the ad, Jane Edmonds. I knew I’d seen her somewhere. Sure enough, she was a speaker attesting to the strengths she had seen in Governor Romney. What was particularly memorable was that she is a Democrat. You can watch her inspirational speech below:

Kerry Healy, Lt. Gov. under Romney wrote the following:

In fact, of the twenty top positions in the Romney administration, ten of them were filled by women, more than any other state in the nation. Romney’s Chief of Staff was a woman – Beth Myers. As we took office, our administration actively sought to recruit the best and brightest women the Commonwealth had to offer. And Governor Romney wasn’t just checking a box. He sought out our counsel, and he listened to our advice. We didn’t always agree, but we were always respected. Mitt Romney didn’t judge the people who were in his administration by their gender. He wanted the best, male or female.

Listening to these educated women who worked along side and respected Mitt Romney makes me think about the war on women. One has to wonder if it is just a contrived tool focusing on a singular issue and hoping that other educated women will not look at all the policies of  Mitt Romney.

 

Conservative Daily News Contributor Kira Davis Ejected by MSNBC

Kira Ayn Davis

Crossposted from AmericanMillenniumOnline.com

Tingle Time Chris Matthews and the MSNBC Crowd must be wetting themselves today because their security guards escorted a black conservative woman and her friends out of their pavilion when she showed a hand-made sign showing her support for Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

Breitbart TV was first with the story and video as Breibart contributing writer Lee Stranahan was there. Kudos to them. The woman with the sign was none other than our own Kira Davis of conservativedailynews.com and KiraDavis.net. Kira’s sign said simply, “Black, Conservative, and Voting for Romney! Romney/Ryan 2012″. See some of the additional video of the event here

 

(Breitbart TV footage of conservative blogger Kira Davis getting ejected from their pavilion at the DNC.)

(Additional footage from Breitbart TV.)

So why was the MSNBC crew so fearful of this woman, Kira Davis and her blogger friends Lee Stranahan, Tabitha Hale and Brandon Darby that they ejected them from the area, banning them and their cameras even though other people had cameras? Because according to the mainstream narrative, black Americans aren’t supposed to be conservative and can’t support Romney. In fact, previously MSNBC has reported that Zero Percent of Black Americans support Romney, even though this is provably false. Look at this report about black conservative delegates at the RNC on The Blaze.

MSNBC and the mainstream media are so stodgy and out of touch that these lefty leftovers can’t understand in their blinding arrogance that they no longer own the narrative. They can’t show this conservative mom from suburban California, can’t interview her. That would destroy their control of that narrative, even though everyone and anyone with a smart phone with a camera, social media and Internet access can be a journalist and fact check the lies that they are bringing forward, even before they finish making their fallacious arguments.

That’s what the Breitbart people did today when they got ejected from the pavilion, they filmed the event and now there is a Twitter and Facebook firestorm that follows. I think this event won’t discourage conservative bloggers like Kira and her friends, it will continue to empower them. The MSM is the media of the past. We own the narrative and they are losing. Kudos to Kira. I can’t wait to hear her on Blogtalk Radio, and see her coverage of the news of the day on conservativedailynews.com and KiraDavis.net. I’m not worried that Chris Matthews won’t interview her. I’m sure someone like Larry O’Connor will. I like him much better, and I trust him. Matthews I can’t stand.

I actually feel kind of bad for MSNBC. You gotta know that the conservative bloggers are going to hammer them over this. I mean, what are they afraid of anyway? Are they racist? Do they hate women? They’re so used to putting those claims out in describing conservatives, fully expecting not to be challenged. But they will be challenged and already have been. I can’t wait until Alfonso Rachel or Stephen Cruiser get a hold of this story. Oh wow, I can see the sparks fly now!

We are winning this fight and Kira Davis is living proof. People don’t believe the lies of the left anymore, except the mind-numbed minority that watch the MSM these days. More and more people get their news from alternative sources, right on their mobile phones and devices. A false claim from one of these talking heads comes out and a news consumer on a smart phone can instantly fact check those claims. It’s no wonder the left wants to regulate the Internet. They are losing control and if measures aren’t taken soon, they will never get it back. Good. The power in this Republic belongs to an informed citizenry. With an open and free Internet, we are freer than we ever have been before.

Thank you Kira, for your courage. You inspire us!

And to the Breitbart people I say this: Andrew inspired us to fight this war, and you are carrying the torch of his legacy very well. I’m sure he would be very proud of all of you. We in the conservative blogosphere aspire to be like you, and him.

Twitter Hashtag #RacistDemocrats

After becoming completely disgusted with MSNBC’s coverage of the RNC Convention, beginning with Chris Mathews assumption that all food stamp recipients are black, to their failure to cover Mia Love, or any GOP minority speaker, I took to Twitter to establish a new hashtag #RacistDemocrat, only to discover someone had beaten me to it.

With the thousands of examples of horrible epithets hurled at black conservatives from the left on social media, and the hundreds of examples of somewhat softer racism from the media and political leaders, it seemed important to have a place to post examples.

After Mia Love’s speech last night, open-minded tolerant democrats took to twitter to call her horrible names and even went so far as to edit her Wikipedia page, calling her a “house nigger.”

From Twitchy.com

Tuesday night after rising GOP star Mia Love brought down the house with her inspiring convention speech, the stomach-turning Left labeled the black conservative a “token” and an “Aunt Tom.”

Meanwhile, revoltingly racist, woman-hating Wikipedia vandals were hard at work updating her entry with disgusting slurs like “House Nigger” and “dirty, worthless whore.” The page called her a “total sell-out to the Right Wing Hate machine and the greedy bigots who control the GOP.”
Glenn Reynolds reported the defacement of Love’s Wikipedia page last night.

Here is a screen shot of the page before it was corrected:

While they claim to want a colorblind society, and discourse in a civil manner, it is becoming increasingly difficult to take anyone on the left seriously when they display this kind of bigotry and hatred.

Code Pink Female Anatomy Protest in Tampa – May be inappropriate for children!

The foul weather did not keep dozens of protesters from “Code Pink” and “Occupy” from showing up in Tampa to oppose the GOP.

Dressed like parts of the female anatomy, many protesters voiced their opinion in support of on demand abortion. Some parts of the attached video may be offensive and not appropriate for children.

Debunking 5 Paul Ryan Myths

When Mitt Romney chose Rep. Paul Ryan to be his running mate nine days ago, he forced Democrats to engage in serious intellectual debate in the coming weeks and months, rather than demagoguing which has been the main practice of the Obama/Biden campaign as of yet.

Paul Ryan holds his Plan, The Path to American Prosperity

Well, that’s what one would have thought, because, well, conventional wisdom says so. However, in the latter, Democrats and the left have tried to demonize Paul Ryan in every way absolutely imaginable. The day after the announcement of Paul Ryan to be the running-mate of Mitt Romney, the attacks started. From Ryan’s budget, to a ‘war on women’, to Ryan ‘pushing grandma off of the cliff’, let’s debunk five myths about Paul Ryan.

1. The Ryan Plan Destroys Medicare.

The Liberal New York Congressman, Rep. Steve Israel has recently claimed that the Romney/Ryan ticket is a “nightmare for seniors who’ve earned their Medicare benefits. For the last 18 months, we’ve said Republicans will have to defend the indefensible—their vote to end Medicare.” The Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz has been running around spewing lies claiming that the Ryan Plan would end Medicare as we know it. This wouldn’t be the first time that Schultz has lied, or probably the last. Look at what she said regarding presidential tax returns and Mitt Romney.

The Wyden-Ryan Medicare Plan – yes that is Democratic Senator Ron Wyden from Oregon – says that the plan will not affect anyone over 55. Anyone over 55 wouldn’t see a change in their plans or their benefits. Anyone under 55 wouldn’t either, unless they voluntarily chose to take part in the Plan. Washington would still be paying the premiums for the healthcare choices you made, and if you believed in the basic principles of free-market capitalism, this would improve the services while driving down the cost.

Furthermore, the liberal leaning Urban Institute recently found that the average citizen will pay $149,000 in Medicare taxes, while only taking out $351,000 in medical services during retirement. In reality, the party that doesn’t want to reform Medicare, and who doesn’t want to ‘change Medicare as we know it’, is single-handedly destroying the system from the inside out.

2. Paul Ryan is a Constitutional Obstructionist

According to a recent Gallup Poll, the 112th Congress’ approval rating has hit an all-time low. Of course, Obama, his administration, and his campaign blame the GOP for the gridlock in Congress, which may we not forget; Paul Ryan is a part of. It’s not necessarily fair, considering the House has passed massive amount of bills that focus on economic recovery that have been killed by Harry Reid in the Senate. May we also not forget that, a) Obama’s ‘serious’ budget was rejected by everyone in both the House and the Senate, and b) Ryan’s Budget passed the House by a vote of  228-191.

Contrary to what the President said yesterday during his surprise visit to the press room of the White House, he is stepping across the preverbal line ‘in the sand’. “So, if you happen to see Congressman Ryan, tell him how important this farm bill is to Iowa and our rural communities. It’s time to put politics aside and pass it right away,” the President said last week in Iowa. But in fact, the House has already passed a measure that helps farmers that have been struck financially by the drought.

3. The Ryan Budget is Extreme

President Obama’s Campaign Manager, Jim Messina, someone who probably actually hasn’t sat down and read the Ryan Plan, is calling the plan ‘radical’.

New York Times Columnist, Paul Krugman, is spewing the common lies about the Ryan Plan. He said the plan, “would kill people, no question,” while the Plan would “cut discretionary spending to levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge.” In defense of Coolidge, life wasn’t that bad under his leadership – low taxation, high economic growth and relative peace. But, to anyone’s surprise, this isn’t true. The Ryan Plan only brings back non-military discretionary spending to the 2008 levels. The plan also cuts the federal bureaucracy and it’s subsidies by 10% and it reforms the compensation plans of federal employees.

But when we talk about discretionary spending as a percentage of the entire budget, you don’t have to be an economic genius to know that Krugman does have a point, but a very misleading one at that. Because mandatory spending has grown at about six times that of discretionary spending over the past 20 years, it’s really easy to argue that President Obama will keep discretionary spending at levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge – anyone could.

However, there are a lot of Conservatives that aren’t exactly in love with the Ryan Budget. For one, it balances the budget over ten years versus the Connie-Mac Penny Plan which balances the budget over eight years. Don’t we know that anything a president implements that expands past his time in office, usually never completely comes to fruition? Meaning, I seriously doubt that the Ryan Budget would make it all ten years.

Moreover, the Ryan Plan only reduces spending from current levels of 24% down to 19.8% of the GDP. Several leading economists have pointed out that this would only bring down federal expenditures to post-WWII levels. Furthermore, in the Ryan Budget federal spending increases over the next ten years, and revenue each year after. The budget would expand from $3.6 trillion in 2013 to $4.9 trillion in 2022.

4. Ryan is at ‘War with Women’

Didn’t we all see this one coming? It’s a classic ‘hail mary’ out of the playbook of the left against anyone on the right. Democratic Pennsylvania Congressman Patrick Murphy said that Ryan “believes we should ban all birth control as well. He voted for that.” The President of NARAL Pro-Choice America, Nancy Keenan, said that Ryan “supported the ‘Let Women Die Bill,’ which would allow hospitals to refuse to provide a woman emergency, lifesaving abortion care, even if she could die without it.”

Gosh, Ryan really does hate woman, right? Wrong. Ryan has never voted or said any of these things that he is being accused of. However, he did vote for the “Protect Life Act,” which would have, if it passed, rewritten provisions in Obamacare that allowed for federal subsidies to be provided for abortions. Ironic, because liberals and the left already claim that the government doesn’t fund abortions. “Protect Life Act,” also had a provision that exempted Catholic hospitals from having to pay for contraception or abortions. He also supported a bill that would have dulled the HHS Mandate that Catholic hospitals provide free condoms.

5. Ryan’s Plan Favors the Rich

Another classic play from the playbook of those on the left – class warfare. A day on the campaign trail just wouldn’t be right with a little class warfare. Many on the left have claimed that Romney “chose a leader of the House Republicans who shares his commitment” of a “new budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy…”

Regardless of what you will hear from Chris Matthews, Al Sharpton or an Obama SuperPAC add, there are absolutely zero special tax cuts in the Ryan Budget ‘for the wealthy’. Common sense tells you that when Washington enacts across-the-board tax reform, the rich (who already pay the vast majority of the taxes) are likely to benefit. Ryan’s Plan however, only supports keeping the current tax rates that we’ve had for the last decade – one’s that a lot on the left have also supported.

What the Ryan plan does do is simplify our tax system. We currently have a six-bracket tax system. Under the Ryan Plan, this would be simplified to two tax brackets – the lower bracket being a 10% bracket, and the upper bracket being a 25% bracket. This plan fixes the Alternative Minimum Tax, and cuts corporate tax rates to reflect those of other competitive nations to the U.S. Ryan and Romney both also support closing loopholes that wealthy Americans disproportionally use.

 

Follow me on Twitter: @chrisenloe

Walmart Moms Are Key in 2012

Alex Bratty

The 2012 election is currently in a dead heat. Americans are evenly split with 46% favoring President Obama and 45% favoring Mitt Romney.  This current election cycle just crossed the 1 billion dollar mark and 9% of the electorate is still undecided.   One of those groups that can tip the balance and could pose a threat to Obama’s re-election bid is the Walmart Moms.  Walmart Moms are defined as a group of women who have hit economic hard times, have shopped at a Walmart store in the past month, and are typically young.  In fact, 47% of all Walmart Moms have been hit with an “economic speed bump.”

Alex Bratty of Public Opinion Strategies detailed this demographic at Smart Girl Summit this past Friday.  They are identified as a swing group with moderate leanings.  They voted Democratic in 2008, but decided to takes away the president’s credit card in 2010 and sided with Republicans.  They make up 27% of all registered women voters and constitute 14% of the electorate.  Needless to say, both camps should be catering to these young moms.

Concerning party identification, they’re almost evenly split 35%-33% Democratic to Republican.  Overall, 49% of them want Republicans to control Congress compared to 39% who don’t.  This is very different considering that when compared to all women voters, 38% want the GOP to control congress while 45% do not.

In her study, Bratty and her firm found out that:

  1. Walmart Moms are not fully engaged in the campaign dialogue, but there is an increasing amount of interest in this year’s election.
    Compared to 2011 (and our online discussion groups conducted in April this year), these moms seem more interested in the upcoming presidential elections. They are aware that the race is between President Obama and Mitt Romney, and some can describe certain differences between the two candidates. A few in each group have already seen some campaign ads. However, their knowledge tends to be somewhat vague. It is clear they are still not fully engaged and cannot describe the campaigns or the candidates with much detail.
  2. President Obama is more recognizable and familiar to these moms, while Mitt Romney is still largely unknown.As might be expected, these Walmart Moms are more familiar with President Obama and his family than with Mitt Romney. Indeed, both groups tend to know very little about Romney. They know he is a businessman, and some note he is a family man, but most are unable to offer many other specifics.

     

    WALMART MOMS: UNSURE ABOUT BOTH CANDIDATES & UNDECIDED IN THEIR VOTE

    1. Walmart Moms have doubts about both candidates.Although these moms are more familiar with President Obama, some have doubts about his abilities to get the country moving in the right direction. Specifically, some say Obama has not delivered on his 2008 campaign promises, or say he has not done more during his last three years to address the economy. And, there are mixed views on what he has done so far: some give him praise for health care reform, while others view it negatively.As for Romney, some moms perceive him as being out of touch, citing his personal demeanor or wealth as signs of this. Nonetheless, there is some uncertainty around who he is and most moms are just beginning to learn about him, his positions and what he stands for.
    2. Romney’s business background produces different points of view.These Walmart Moms in Richmond and Las Vegas are most likely to describe Mitt Romney as a businessman. Moms in both groups acknowledge the potential benefits of having a president with his experience. Some moms hope his success means he can apply his knowledge and skillset to the country’s economy if elected. One mom said the country “is like a big business.”However, some moms seem to be more worried about Romney’s business background. They mention he has closed factories and say he has cut jobs in the past, making them question how he might approach his term in office if elected.
    3. The families of the candidates are very important as these moms consider their vote.Make no mistake, the family lives of the candidates do matter. One of the first attributes the moms associate with each candidate is being a “good family man.” These moms give kudos to Michelle Obama and her work on healthy eating/living; and Latina Walmart Moms note that they can identify with her as a minority woman. They also appreciate that Obama has daughters and is “surrounded by women.”Mitt Romney is also recognized and praised as being a family man. However, since they know less about him, they also know less about his family at this time, and none are able to talk about his wife and children.

    Charlie Cook also reiterated similar points in his column in the National Journal back in June when Bratty’s report was published stating:

There was a split between those who thought that President Obama had his chance to turn things around and those who hesitated about changing presidents when things were so bad. They were uncertain about having to start all over with change in a different direction. With few notable exceptions, these women did not identify so much with “women’s issues” as they did with “moms’ issues.”

For these women, Mitt Romney’s business background seems to be a double-edged sword: There’s an assumption that as a successful businessman, he brings some expertise to the table when it comes to the economy. But the perception of him being cool and aloof, and the impact of negative ads about his private-equity firm throwing people out of work, raised doubts about his motivations. There were questions about whether he would side with the average American.

Cook concludes, stating:

Many of these women are still window-shopping this election. Clearly, they knew more about Obama. Most had some degree of comfort with him, though they were concerned that he hadn’t been more effective. Romney, though, was a blank slate. These voters know little about him beyond the fact that he has been a wildly successful businessman. But what little they know came mostly from Democratic attack ads. In other words, they’re still listening.

Mr. Romney, take notice.

Americans For Prosperity Virginia’s Real Facts Tour Exposes Tim Kaine’s Dereliction of Duty

Tim Kaine

As the Virginia U.S. Senate race heats up, Americans for Prosperity’s Virginia Chapter has some interesting facts about Democratic candidate and former Governor Tim Kaine.  Last Saturday, AFP Virginia’s State Director Audrey Jackson, writer and Fox News contributor Dick Morris, political analyst Kate Obenshain, conservative activist Stephen Kruiser, and radio talk show host and Townhall.com contributor Tony Katz embarked on a week long bus tour throughout the state exposing Tim Kaine’s leftist policies that have hurt Virginia.  They were also joined by AFP President Tim Phillips and other local activists leading the the fight for economic liberty and limited government.

The focus of the Real Facts, Real Solutions bus was clear. AFP VA is dedicated to pushing a narrative based on the governor’s record stating “Virginians deserve better than the debt and higher taxes he left us with when he [Kaine] left the Governor’s Office. Leading the efforts in Virginia, Kaine supported government run health care, he supported a billion dollars in tax increases.  When Governor in 2005 he inherited $1.2 billion surplus, yet he left Virginians with a $4.2 billion dollar budget shortfall when he left office.  In addition, he increased Virginia’s debt by nearly 50% and he continues to stand by President Obama’s failed policies.  Virginia can’t afford more of Tim Kaine’s policies.”

Tito Munoz

The event, held in Woodbridge this past Friday, was greeted by a few misguided Kaine supporters protesting outside the L&B Pizzeria, but concluded without  incident.  Local activist Tito Munoz gave passionate remarks concerning how this fight is about the future of our country and not about political allegiances. He stated how economic strife proliferated throughout the state under the Kaine administration and how we need  people to continue to fight the left’s agenda.   Munoz continued by showing how socialism is a failed economic philosophy that destroyed the Soviet Union and is ruining nations like Venezuela and Cuba.  As an immigrant from Latin America, he stated how he came to this country with nothing and knew no English at the time.  However, he worked hard and has achieved success as a businessman.  Living proof that the American Dream is still alive, but endangered under the policies of Barack Obama and Tim Kaine.  He concluded on how the Democratic Party has moved far to the left and the Kennedy Democrats of the past are long gone.  Hence, why we must deny Tim Kaine a seat in the U.S. Senate because America deserves better and Virginians need a representative who has the taxpayers’ interests at heart.

AFP Tim Phillips reiterated those points concerning the huge fight ahead of us.  However, he did mention how conservatives may have become a bit complacent about the outcome of the recent Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare.  Although he did state how could we not become lulled into that false sense of security because “hey it’s unconstitutional.”  However, Mr. Phillips was adamant that it’s up to us to push for full repeal with this takeover of health care.  It’s not impossible.  The grassroots of the conservative movement came out in full force in 2010 and took away the president’s credit card.  Then-Speaker (what a nice phrase…) Nancy Pelosi and the Democratic leadership in Congress blew a 50 vote majority in the House and a 60 vote majority in the Senate to pass this takeover and members of the mainstream media forget that this bill started with a 64% approval rating. Mr. Phillips appropriately bashed the former governor for leaving Virginia behind to become Obama’s biggest cheerleader for his policies before completing his term as Governor.

Dick Morris

However, Dick Morris engaged the crowd by asking them if they were willing to sacrifice a week’s salary to pay the fine for not buying health insurance.  This should be the next poll about Obamacare.  Mr. Morris gave perspicacious examples on how this new law will indelibly change how you make your health care decisions with your doctor. For example, a thirty year old illegal immigrant could get a hip replacement, but an eighty-year old war veteran could be denied since his “quality years are limited.”   It could lead to more deaths amongst women since mammograms will not be covered annually, but bi-annually.  We all know that detection is critical in the fight against cancer and this change will put 13,000 women at risk.  Talk about the war on women. Mr. Morris also detailed how Avastin, an effective cancer fighting drug, is banned from Canada due to restrictions imposed by its health care bureaucracy. Welcome to the world of rationed care.

Mr. Morris reminded the audience that Tim Kaine was on the frontlines promoting Obamacare and how the Supreme Court is not a reliable institution when it comes to protecting our rights.  That responsibility rests with us on the political battlefield.  He stated why unemployment has remained above 8% over the past forty months.  It’s not because the disease is stubborn, it’s because the prescriptions Obama has been writing to cure the illness aren’t working.  As a result, this creates a volatile business climate, which is why corporations and banks are holding, cumulatively, $3 trillion in cash and aren’t lending or investing to create jobs and grow the economy.  Obama’s remedy to this problem is borrow more and spend more to a point where, as Morris indicated, we’re entering a debt implosion cycle. An event this nation has experienced in the 1840s, 1890s, and 1930s.  Morris stated that if Kaine were in the audience, he would give frivolous excuses, like striking at the right time when they had the majorities in congress, because they were afraid that their opportunity of passing government-run healthcare legislation would slip away again.  Hence, the progressive mind in action, which centers on sacrificing what is economically responsible for the sake of scoring political points.

Tony Katz

Concerning bad policy, the inimitable Tony Katz gave his experiences coming from a state fraught with bad policy.  As a California resident, Mr. Katz has seen his fair share of bad government.  He cites the city of Stockton filing for bankruptcy and twenty other cities waiting in the wings destined to suffer the same fate.  He was concise and to the point.  It’s a battle between bad policy and good policy.  Tim Kaine inherited a $1.2 billion dollar surplus and left the Governor’s mansion saddling Virginia with $4.2 billion dollars in debt.  He stated that people aren’t stupid and know the difference, which is why a convict in West Virginia was able to win 40% of the vote in the Democratic primary last spring.  This is a result of the Obama administration’s war on coal.  He concluded with California’s pending referendum this November that would raise taxes, yet again, on its residents because Gov. Jerry Brown has increased the deficit from $9 billion to $16 billion.  He stated “Don’t be like California” and this November the fight is about policy, not politics.

 

Kate Obenshain

Political analyst Kate Obenshain dove deeper into the policy aspect concerning Mr. Kaine.  She shattered the false narrative that he was a political “moderate.”  You’re not a moderate when you become the DNC chair between Howard Dean and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz.  Ms. Obenshain stated under the Kaine administration, there wasn’t a single entitlement program he didn’t want to expand.  Mr. Kaine pushed the Democratic Party’s dependency agenda and more Virginians were enslaved in the various poverty programs as a result.  A travesty considering that Virginia was the model for welfare reform in the 1990s.   Mr. Kaine’s moderate disposition looks very shoddy when as governor, his budget proposal contained the largest tax increase in Virginia state history.  Not one member of the Virginia state legislature voted for it, similar to Obama’s budget, which resulted with the closure of 19 of 42 rests stops to save money.  In actual fact, Virginia Department of Transportation was sitting on $1.4 billion dollars and the closure was wholly unnecessary.  Mr. Kaine chose to ignore this information.

Kaine pushed cap and tax and refused to pursue offshore drilling permits.  When the permits were up for bidding again, he petitioned the Department of the Interior to delay the sale. As governor, Mr. Kaine was more concerned about pushing the Obama agenda than looking after the interests of Virginians, which constitutes a dereliction of duty on his part.  A lack of vigilance that cost Virginia up to 100,000 new jobs.

Stephen Kruiser

As the pizza and wings began to dwindle, comedian and conservative activist Stephen Kruiser, another resident of commie -California, gave a rousing rallying cry stating that we should never take the left’s criticism that we are powerless.  Power is in everyone who cares, who knocks on doors, and makes phone calls.  If you think that’s wrong, just look at Wisconsin or ask former Sen. Dick Lugar.  He stated how gatherings, like the one held in Woodbridge, from grassroots organizations like AFP scares politicians, especially the those who advocate bad policy.  What’s so great about this country, as Kruiser stated, is that “it’s a nation where you can witness a failed policy and work your butt off to throw that politician out on the street.”  Americans for Prosperity is doing a great job exposing politicians peddling bad policy.  Don’t reward them. Throw them out and deny them another term as a reward for pushing policies that harm American freedom.  Mr. Kaine is one of those politicians.

 

 

 

 

What A Shocker! Sandra Fluke Endorses Obama

Liberal activist Sandra Fluke took to the airwaves this afternoon to announce her endorsement of President Obama, which isn’t surprising in the slightest.  Fluke was made famous for her pseudo-congressional hearing concerning women’s health that prompted radio host Rush Limbaugh to chastise her as a slut.  She was also featured because of her op-ed piece that was posted on CNN today with the editor’s noteSandra Fluke graduated cum laude from Georgetown University Law Center and has served as president of Georgetown Law Students for Reproductive Justice.”  Yes, highlight her academic credentials, but don’t divulge the fact that she’s is a political hack.

The piece itself is the personification of the Obamamania craze that swept the millennial generation into action four years ago.  She details how the president “is committed to rebuilding our economy upon the values of fairness and opportunity and the belief that all Americans, both men and women, must have the rights they deserve..asking Congress to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act to help stop pay discrimination before it starts and close the 23% gap between women’s earnings and men’s earnings…[and] Obama has moved our country forward by working not only to ensure Americans’ prosperity, but also by guaranteeing that our rights are protected and we all have opportunities to succeed. By comparison, Romney has offered only frightening promises to send us backward.”

The succeeding paragraphs bash Romney  in a similar fashion seen in the Obama campaign’s Julia presentation depicting a miserable existence for American women.  If you’ve seen it, you know what I’m talking about.   However, in the interview, CNN’s Carol Costello must have missed the information that stated Fluke she was already a political activist before Georgetown because she hardly grilled her.

CAROL COSTELLO CNN: You were a Georgetown student. Now you’re a full- blown political activist. And you wrote this op-ed for CNN.com. You endorsed the president. 

Do you think people will take your endorsement seriously?

SANDRA FLUKE: Well, I think that they can take it for what it’s worth. I have looked very closely at these policies. And I take very seriously anything that I take a position on. That’s actually why I waited until now to endorse anyone in this presidential election.

I felt that a lot of people were looking to me for my opinion, following these controversies. And I wanted to remain nonpartisan and specifically look at which policies I could support.

 But I have just concluded that Governor Romney must not be looking for the vote of people like me because he’s not taking a stand on issues that are really important to me. Issues like the Paycheck Fairness Act or, you know, so many other things that I’m concerned about.

Later on in the segment, Costello asked  “well, by the same token, Mitt Romney’s favorability rating among women is rising. And if he doesn’t care about these things that you’re talking about, why do you suppose that is?

”

Fluke responded by saying “I think that he’s recently been selected as the Republican nominee. And there’s inevitably a consolidation around a nominee when that occurs, and that’s what we’re seeing. That said, for months now we have seen the president having a considerable lead among women.

And that’s because they know that he is a strong leader for the policies that we care about. Policies like affordable access to education, in terms of student loan rates. And policies like the Paycheck Fairness Act, the Violence Against Women Act.

”

Yes, the Paycheck Fairness Act would help equalize the salaries of those female staffers amongst the women’s wing of the Democratic Senate Caucus who pay them much less than their male counterparts, but that is a hypocrisy analysis for another day.  Concerning unemployment, Costello pressed Fluke by asking “But when you look at the unemployment figures for young people, they are pretty abysmal. Why should young people, the millennial generation, enthusiastically support this president?

”  I found the response lacking to say the least.

FLUKE: Actually, I saw something on ABC recently that things are increasingly — that this is the best time for employment opportunities for young college graduates since this recession started. And I think that the difference between Governor Romney and President Obama is that both of them are very focused on improving the economy for all of us, but President Obama is focused on improving it for all of us, not just for the select, wealthy few, and making sure that we have the rights and protections that we need in those jobs and in that workplace.

COSTELLO: I’m not sure that many college students who have just graduated would agree that the employment picture is looking any brighter.

FLUKE: The ones I have spoken to do actually.

COSTELLO: Really if what do they say? Are they finding jobs? The college students that we talk with are having a difficult time.

FLUKE: Well, I have talked with lots of folks who I graduated with in terms of law school graduates. This is the first year that things are looking up for them and increasing rates. And I am hearing that from graduates across the country.

What was the “something” on ABC?  When I searched the ABC news website, I did find an artitcle titled “College Graduates Enjoy Best Job Market in Years.” However, the piece states that “the unemployment rate for college graduates 24 and under averaged 7.2% from January through April. That rate, which is not adjusted for seasonal factors, is down from the first four months of 2011 (9.1%), 2010 (8.1%) and 2009 (7.8%). For all Americans, the unemployment rate is 8.1 percent.”  How is this good news for college graduates?  Furthermore, if Ms. Fluke was a serious journalist, she could at least name one guy or gal she chatted with about the economy, but I guess hacks don’t have much time to write down names.  They have to post columns and give interviews detailing the Obama agenda under the false pretenses of “remaining nonpartisan.”

P.S. Last time I checked, Romney lead women according to a CBS-NYT poll.

Equal Rights for Unborn Feminists!

When you’re on the wrong side of Planned Parenthood, you’re on the right side of history.

The left’s disingenuous and intellectually lazy “war on women” talking points have blown up in its face. Most polls show Mitt Romney fast gaining on President Obama with female voters. Some polls even show him pulling ahead.

Still, it’s the multi-billion dollar abortion industry that may just give Romney the boost he needs to take a permanent lead. Just days after pro-life investigative group Live Action released devastating evidence that Planned Parenthood systemically engages in the grisly practice of sex-selection abortion – a charge to which it now admits – the cash-flush abortion Goliath has done Obama an ironic disservice by endorsing his re-election bid. The group has additionally launched a $1.4 million advertising campaign to smear Mitt Romney.

Let’s put aside for a moment the scandalous disclosure that while Planned Parenthood receives over 350 million per annum in your taxpayer dollars, it nonetheless spends millions engaging in partisan politicking for the DNC. Troubling as that may be, utterly horrific is the revelation that this extremist organization – which absurdly presumes to defend “women’s rights” – has been caught red-handed torturing little girls to death in mamma’s womb, simply because mamma wanted a boy.

This discovery – eerily reminiscent of Communist China’s forced one-child sex-selection policy – has shocked the conscience of an entire nation. So disturbing are the facts that on Thursday the U.S. House of Representatives voted on the Prenatal Non-Discrimination Act (PRENDA), H.R. 354, introduced by Republicans in Congress. Unbelievably, because the bill required a two-thirds majority for passage, Democrats were able to narrowly abort the measure by a vote of 246-168.

The legislation, which would have outlawed sex-selection abortions altogether, was also opposed by President Obama. This comes as little surprise when you consider that, while a state senator, Obama repeatedly fought Illinois’ Born Alive Infant Protection Act. This law simply required that when a baby survives a botched abortion – when she is “born alive” – further attempts to kill her must immediately cease, and steps must be taken to save her life.

But according to our president – leader of the “civilized” world – a law preventing the abortionist from finishing her off is “really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the physician to induce labor and perform an abortion.”

This, coupled with Democratic support for sex-selection abortion (now on record), represents the true “war on women.” This is misogyny at its deadly worst. Take note, America: Obama and Democrats have officially endorsed the Mengelian practice of explicitly targeting little girls – over boys – for live dismemberment.

Still, there is good news here. This entire saga has placed in the national spotlight the irreconcilable incongruities central to our nation’s ongoing policy of legalized abortion on demand.

Consider, for instance, that under current federal and state law, if an off-duty abortionist – if any man, for that matter – physically assaults a woman and her unborn daughter dies, that man has committed murder. Yet if mom walks into Planned Parenthood and authorizes that same man to rip her baby girl limb-from-limb, it’s her “choice.” First case: murder. Second case: “choice.” Both cases: dead baby girl.

Furthermore, consider that – as established by a 2006 Zogby International poll of over 30,000 Americans in 48 states – 86 percent support a law banning sex-selection abortion. Doesn’t it stand to reason, then, that since the vast majority recognize the objectively reprehensible nature of sex-selection abortion, they, too, might recognize that it’s equally reprehensible for mom to have baby killed for no reason at all? This is what current law allows, without restriction, through the ninth month.

Indeed, incongruities abound. Still, it is the indefensible nature of empty “pro-choice” rhetoric that, I believe, will ultimately end legalized abortion in America. Truth, even when buried for decades, eventually has a way of rising to the surface.

It’s inevitable. Roe v. Wade will, in time, be tossed, alongside the slavery-justifying Dred Scott decision, exactly where both shameful scars on Lady Liberty belong: in the trash heap of historical inhumanity.

Just as those who excused slavery are reviled by history, so, too, will be those who called themselves “pro-choice.”

Matt Barber (@jmattbarber on Twitter) is an attorney concentrating in constitutional law. He serves as Vice President of Liberty Counsel Action. (This information is provided for identification purposes only.)

House of Representatives Fails to Pass Bill Banning Sex-Selective Abortion

This afternoon, the House of Representatives failed to pass a bill that would make sex-selective abortions a federal crime. This vote comes shortly after pro-life group Live Action released two undercover videos showing Planned Parenthood workers encouraging sex-selective abortions.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Trent Franks R-Ariz., would have made aborting a baby based on its sex or coercing a woman into an abortion based on the baby’s gender a federal crime punishable by up to 5 years in prison. Bringing a woman into the United States for the purpose of a sex-selective abortion also would be a crime punishable by up to five years in prison. The bill would not have punished the woman seeking the abortion.

246 representatives voted for the bill and 168 voted against, but the bill needed a two-thirds majority to pass and fell short by 30 votes.

Republican supporters of the bill argue that there is clear evidence in the US of women aborting their baby due to its female gender, especially amongst women who come from cultures where having a male is preferable. This practice is well known in countries such as India and China, although sex-selective abortions have been banned due to the imbalance in the gender ratio it causes. In the wake of Live Action’s video showing employees telling customers how to get a sex-selective abortion, US abortion giant, Planned Parenthood, has refused to ban the practice of sex-selective abortions.

Democrats opposed the bill because they say the evidence of sex-selective abortions is limited. They also voiced fears that doctors would be policing their patients. Earlier, White House spokesperson Jay Carney spoke about the sex-selective abortion debate, stating that President Obama did not support a ban because he believes the vote to be purely ideological. Carney also expressed the president’s reluctance to insert federal law into private and personal decisions.

Republican legislators have noted that this fight comes in the middle of Democratic claims of the so-called Republican war on women, yet given the opportunity to protect unborn women, Democrats have refused to do so.

Conservative Personality S. E. Cupp Sickeningly Attacked by Hustler

Conservatives may be familiar with gutsy GBTV personality S. E. Cupp. Cupp, who frequently appears on Fox News and various media outlets is a strong, fiery conservative who minces no words about her opinions, and doesn’t apologize for them either.

Because of this, she’s been the subject of personal attack before, although none quite as reprehensible as Hustler magazine’s recent decision to doctor an image of Ms. Cupp. Under the heading “What Would S. E. Cupp Look Like With a D*ck in Her Mouth?”, Hustler published a ‘composite fantasy picture’ of Ms. Cupp with genitalia in her mouth as an indictment of her pro-life stance, apparently justifying this sick attack with a disclaimer saying the image is altered and ‘should not be taken seriously’.

A redacted image of the photo, taken from The Blaze:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The caption attached to the photo reads:

“S.E. Cupp is a lovely young lady who read too much Ayn Rand in high school and ended up joining the dark side. Cupp, an author and media commentator who often shows up on Fox News program, is undeniably cute. But her hotness is diminished when she espouses dumb ideas like defunding Planned Parenthood. Perhaps the method pictured here is Ms. Cupp’s suggestion for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy.”

Where is the National Organization of Women? Recently, they sponsored a boycott of Rush Limbaugh’s radio program because of his comments about Sandra Fluke. Yet, the virtual rape of a woman is somehow not their concern? The About section of NOW’s website states that, among other things, NOW focuses on representation of women in the media. Surely then, this despicable media attack of S. E. Cupp is in the realm of NOW’s concern. Or could it be that, because Ms. Cupp is a conservative, NOW somehow does not deem her worthy of defense?

Hustler has every right to publically disagree with Ms. Cupp’s conservatism and pro-life stance, but that right is not extended to character defamation or actual malice. Given the nature of the photo, and the commentary alongside, the malice behind Hustler’s image is hard to miss. Hustler refers to Ms. Cupp as ‘a member of the dark side’- read conservative. They call her support of life ‘a dumb idea’. And the doctored image they suggest is Ms. Cupp’s idea of preventing unwanted pregnancy. This is much more than disagreeing with Ms. Cupp’s opinion. Disagreeing with her pro-life stance is the paragraph accompanying the photo, which snidely mocks her conservatism. Malice is the phallic image, doctored to portray her in a manner she neither acted in or agreed to be portrayed in. S. E. Cupp may be a public figure, and open to public comment, but that status does not mean her rights vanish. This is not a joke, as Hustler suggests. This is sick and perverted.

This brutal attack on a conservative woman once again shows where the true war on women stems from. Not the right wing media, but the left wing media, which for all it claims to see women as more than mere sexual receptacles, can apparently only respond to arguments they disagree with by name calling and creating images which portray women as receptacles. Women everywhere should be outraged, and not just at Hustle for portraying Ms. Cupp in this light. Women should be outraged that the National Organization of Women puts party politics above the rights of people it claims to represents. If NOW had any scruples, they would be defending Ms. Cupp’s rights to speak her mind instead of remaining silent in this disgusting attack on a strong woman.

« Older Entries Recent Entries »