Tag Archives: war on women

A Successful Script for Prolife Republicans

'War on Women' attacks on GOP candidates aren't going away any time soon.

‘War on Women’ attacks on GOP candidates aren’t going away any time soon.

Virginia voters decided after much deliberation that they would rather be ruled by a sleazebag than a puritan. And if Ken Cuccinelli needed any more proof that he should have run for re–election as attorney general — something he promised initially — Tuesday’s election results should have provided it.

Cuccinelli had a number of problems that hampered his campaign (outlined here). But the biggest problems he had were caused by Ken Cuccinelli. First he fell into the “new best friend” trap and took gifts from Star Scientific’s Jonnie Williams, a man whose ethical profile is much like that of our new governor, Terry McAuliffe.

Second, Cuccinelli used the “duck and cover” method of responding to McAuliffe’s obsession with abortion and activities involving female private parts.

Marjorie Dannenfelser — President of the Susan B. Anthony Lists — calculates that McAuliffe blasted Cuccinelli with 5,600 negative commercials on abortion and contraception. Talk about a campaign obsessed with social issues!

The attacks ranged from “Cuccinelli will force you to have the baby after a crazed member of the TEA party rapes you” to “Crazy Ken wants to melt all your rubbers.”

Cuccinelli’s response was much like that of the Obama Administration last year on 9/11 in Libya: He pretended nothing was happening while the campaign burned down around him.

I’ve got news for Republicans. This ‘War on Women’ attack is going to be a staple of Democrat campaigns as long as Amnesty; Abortion & Alternate Lifestyles are the three main planks of the party platform. Duck and cover would not have worked during nuclear attack in the 60’s and it won’t work under pubic attack now.

GOP candidates must either meet and defeat this tactic or at the very least blunt its impact.

I’m a media consultant and I hate to write commercials for free — somehow it feels like I’m betraying capitalism — but this is a script Cuccinelli could have used to counter McAuliffe’s negative ads.

The production would be simple and straightforward, as befits a serious topic. Cuccinelli should deliver the message himself looking straight to camera (this time memorizing his lines, which he evidently didn’t do for most of his commercials). The set should not be distracting, but he needs a light package that doesn’t make him look like he needs a transfusion. His tone begins by dismissing one of the McAuliffe attacks and then concludes with a serious defense of life.

 

(KEN CUCCINELLI) HI, I’M KEN CUCCINELLI AND I’D LIKE TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT.

TERRY MCAULIFFE AND HIS SUPPORTERS ARE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN THEY SAY I WANT TO BAN CONTRACEPTION. MY WIFE, TEIRO AND I HAVE SEVEN CHILDREN. I’VE HEARD THERE ARE OTHER FAMILIES IN VIRGINIA WITH FEWER AND EVEN SOME WITH NO CHILDREN. AND THAT’S FINE WITH ME.

WHEN A COUPLE USES CONTRACEPTION IT’S THEIR CHOICE AND NONE OF GOVERNMENT’S BUSINESS.

BUT ABORTING A PREGNANCY IS ANOTHER MATTER. I BELIEVE THAT LIFE IS PRECIOUS AND JUST AS GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT INTERFERE WITH CONTRACEPTION, IT ALSO SHOULD NOT ENCOURAGE ABORTION.

BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW OFTEN MY OPPONENT TALKs ABOUT HEALTH AND DOCTORS AND ‘CHOICE,’ THE FACT IS ABORTION IS NOT ABOUT REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH; IT’S ABOUT ENDING A LIFE BEFORE IT HAS A CHANCE TO BEGIN.

I THINK THAT’S A TRAGEDY FOR BOTH THE MOTHER AND THE UNBORN CHILD. YOU MAY NOT AGREE AND YOU ARE CERTAINLY FREE TO VOTE FOR MY OPPONENT. BUT PLEASE, DON’T DO IT BASED ON HIS DISTORTIONS AND EXAGGERATIONS.

 

It may not be the perfect :60 script, but I would nominate it for the perfect free script. After the shooting is done the campaign puts the commercial on cable TV, where the rates are lower and you can afford to run :60s. Then the spot runs until the campaign is over. It answers the McAuliffe mudslinging without being hysterical.

Responding in this manner does bring up a topic that a large portion of the electorate opposes. And some consultants are simply uncomfortable with the subject.

But the abortion–obsessed aren’t going to vote for Cuccinelli anyway, and answering the topic beats hoping it will go away. The commercial is designed to persuade the “moderates” and independents that Ken isn’t Cotton Mather in a poplin suit. Moving the opposition from “OMG he wants to take us back to colonial times!” to simply disagreeing with Cuccinelli is a giant step that was not taken this campaign.

And it certainly beats the Cuccinelli strategy of not answering the attack at all or using women in tangential ads to prove Republicans are as good at showcasing tokens as the Democrats.

If Christian conservatives are interested in winning they are going to have to address these attacks forcefully and change the debate. As Robert Knight wrote this week, “Ever since the GOP-controlled Virginia legislature in 2012 passed a law requiring abortionists to give women ultrasound imaging before an abortion, Democrats have had a field day accusing Republicans of being “extremists” who want to force women to have “transvaginal ultrasounds.” The Democrats are fine, of course, with “transvaginal abortions.”

If we don’t change the context we can’t hope to change the culture.

The Left’s Continuing War on Women

war on women

New York mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner and his wife Huma Abedin attend a news conference in New YorkHuma Abedin learned from a young age that as a woman, she’s a second class citizen. Her value is not equal to that of a man, therefore she must tolerate whatever painful, humiliating or otherwise unpleasant treatment the man in her life decides to unleash upon her. Not only must she tolerate it, she must accept it as her due. She must not question it, fight it, or be seen to be upset by it.

Many people are wondering why she is standing by her philandering, pervert of a husband, Anthony Weiner. Some assume she’s taking notes from another “feminist”, Hillary Clinton, who’s also accepted second class status in favor of her powerful husband and that is probably true to a certain degree. But there is a far more sinister reason. Not only is Abedin a practicing Muslim, she was raised by a mother who is an ardent defender of Sharia Law, supporter of female genital mutilation, and a founding member of the Muslim Sisterhood, a Muslim Brotherhood women’s group.

In addition, Abedin’s mother Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is the longtime chairwoman of the International Islamic Committee for Women and Children (IICWC) which calls for, among other things, decriminalizing female genital mutilation, child marriage, polygamy for men, and child abuse. They also seek to disallow women from registering their newborns for a birth certificate by themselves because, according to Sharia Law, a child’s lineage belongs strictly to the father.

Huma Abedin has not actively participated in such blatant anti-woman advocacy, but neither has she distanced herself from it. For that matter, neither has her “feminist” mentor Hillary Clinton. During Clinton’s trip to Saudi Arabia last year, the Secretary of State visited and spoke at the Islamic college of Dar El-Hekma along with Huma, where Dr. Saleha Mahmood Abedin was a vice-dean and one of its founders.

While it’s unlikely that Huma is as big a fan of Sharia Law as her mother, there is no doubt these destructive and dangerous beliefs have heavily influenced her worldview, both personally and politically. While the left pretends women having to buy their own birth control is a “war on women”, the real war is being waged by those who don’t vehemently denounce the despicable behavior of men like Weiner and the mindset of women who are coerced by a perverted religion to embrace it.

Contraceptives are a right after all

°Florian (CC)

Liberals all over the country must be breathing a sigh of relief, because they have been vindicated. Apparently the Sandra Flukes of the world don’t just reside in the US. Well, they sort of do, at least in NYC, because they have taken up residence in the UN.

°Florian (CC)


Yes, that monument to everything that liberals hold dear has come out of the contraceptive closet, and stated that birth control is a right for women worldwide. Their contention is based on the theory that women should be able to control when they have children – in poor nations. Of course, given our current economic problems, one can wonder whether or not the international body thinks the US is included in that number.

Now, before we let the liberals in this country get ready to organize birth control orgies, remember two things. First, this statement is from the UN, and has no effect on national laws whatsoever. Second, it says nothing about giving birth control away free of charge, per se. The UN merely states that there should not be financial barriers for women to obtain birth control. As mentioned before, this is primarily in the context of poor nations, where the $15 or so to buy birth control could feasibly feed a family for months. Contrary to what liberals might want to believe, there is no conservative agenda to stop access to birth control. We simply don’t want to pay for it for every woman in the nation.

Martha McSally and the Real War on Women

mcsally

Martha McSally, the Republican candidate for Arizona’s second Congressional District (vacated by Gabby Giffords), explains in stark terms the real war on women on Greta Van Sustern’s show.

As shown in the video, McSally has already gotten her feet wet when it comes to getting legislation through Congress – after battling the Department of Defense under Donald Rumsfeld, she saw to it that our women warriors in the military are not forced to wear traditional Muslim garb when overseas and off-duty.

Campaign Ads: Appealing to Women?

tugowar1

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.

Live Action Advocate Exposes Planned Parenthood’s Botched Abortions and Cover-ups

Screen Shot 2012-10-24 at 12.08.43 PM

Lila Rose, of the Live Action Advocate, has released a video exposing Planned Parenthood’s negligence in the death of Tonya Reaves, who bled to death in a botched abortion at one of their clinics.  Additionally, the video contains recorded phone conversations with Planned Parenthood employees lying to would-be visitors about the health risks involved with an abortion procedure at clinics that have had medical emergencies in the past.  It’s utterly despicable.

In an email that accompanied the release of this video, Rose said that:

when a caller ask[ed] Planned Parenthood’s Birmingham, AL, abortion clinic if when women get abortions at the clinic, ‘They’re not in danger, they don’t get, like, injured?’ Planned Parenthood responds, ‘No ma’am, we don’t have any type of procedure where a woman would receive an injury.’ While the Birmingham Planned Parenthood clinic botched a woman’s abortion in 2010 while it was on probation from the Alabama Department of Health.

‘Our investigation exposes not only how unsafe Planned Parenthood clinics can be for women, but also how dishonest and untrustworthy Planned Parenthood is to the very women it claims to defend,’ says Rose. ‘How shameful that two months after their clinic botched an abortion that took the life of 24-year old Tonya Reaves and her pre-born baby, Planned Parenthood lies to the public and pretends nothing happened. When it comes to the lethal dangers of its billion-dollar abortion business, no lie is too audacious for Planned Parenthood.’

‘Planned Parenthood continues to engage practices that hurt women and young girls, all while billing themselves as the guardians of women’s health,’ says Rose. ‘Our investigation proves that Planned Parenthood has little regard for the safety concerns of its ‘patients’ and continues to lie and mislead the public about the dangers of abortion.’

Furthermore, Rose notes that while “President Obama campaigns for women voters, one of his top donors and champions, Planned Parenthood, is deceiving millions of American women about the services they provide, their history of abuse cover up, [and] their radical abortion agenda.”

It’s videos like these that should have everyone rethinking, or reaffirming, their opinions when Susan G. Komen for the Cure decided to rescind its $500,000+ grant to Planned Parenthood last winter, which sparked controversy and saw pro-choice groups become, oddly enough, anti-choice with their bullying of Komen to reinstate their donation.

While this is an election about the economy, it’s indicative of the type of campaign Obama wants to run by relying so heavily on these wedge issues, and employing Cecile Richards, President of Planned Parenthood, to campaign for him full time as Election 2012 comes to a close.

Liberals will certainly eat this up, and given that Romney is surging with women, which explains his surge in the polls, expect the left to hammer him harder on these peripheral issues.

Richards says that a Romney presidency would “set women back decades.”  Tell that to the family of Tonya Reaves.

Originally Posted on Hot Air.

Even Slate’s Feminist Blog Finds The ‘Binders’ Meme Stupid

Screen Shot 2012-10-23 at 5.47.54 PM

 

Even Slate Magazine’s feminist blog, Double X, which was co-founded by Hanna Rosin, who recently authored The End of Men, thinks the “binders full of women” meme is stupid.  Amanda Hess wrote on October 17 that she “agree[s] that Romney’s positions on health care, contraception, and the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act will do nothing to help women…binders stocked with intelligence on top-shelf female candidates, though? I’m cool with those. In a rush to discredit Romney’s position entirely, commenters are strangely spinning his underlying point—when female candidates don’t apply for jobs, employers should find them, and hire them about half the time—as somehow anti-feminist.”

Now, some groups, such as the bipartisan MassGap, noted that these “binders” were assembled before Romney was elected Governor, but it’s beside the point “because binders from feminist groups are easy for governors to trash,” according to Hess.  In all, Hess is  “more interested in what he [Romney] did with those candidates…[he] ‘appointed 14 women out of his top 33 senior-level appointments,’ which…is ‘reasonably impressive.’ Romney’s lieutenant governor and chief of staff were both women. That puts Romney’s record on hiring womenwell above the national average. Binders full of women mean cabinets full of women.”  I know, Romney is such a sexist, misogynist pig.

Granted, Hess refers to American politics as old boys’ club, but noted that Romney’s binder’s model could help women become more engaged in politics.  She cites “Women & Politics Institute Director Jennifer Lawless has found a serious discrepancy among how similarly-qualified men and women in political pipeline industries—law, policy, finance—rate their own viability as candidates….when Lawless talks to these reluctant women, she finds they have three major justifications for not throwing their hats into the ring: family responsibilities, self-doubt, and a lack of encouragement from above. Mitt Romney’s binders can help resolve two of those issues.”

In all, Hess “still found it powerful to watch the country’s most prominent Republican businessman and politician stand in front of millions of Americans and announce that stacking the deck with female candidates is not at odds with the capitalist impulse.”

Originally posted on Hot Air.

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.

“progressives”: No Puzzle

malala_yousufzai

A teenager in Pakistan gets shot in the head by the Taliban.  She is flown to Britain for emergency medical attention and so she can be protected from the threatened follow up attacks.

All 14-year-old Malala Yousufzai wants is for girls in Pakistan to be able to attend school.

The Taliban has issued threats that state Malala will be a target in the future if she continues to promote what they describe as “Western thinking”.

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AS_PAKISTAN?SITE=VANOV&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-15-16-17-56

Meanwhile, “progressives” in America continue to cling to the “Islam is a religion of peace” fallacy their tenured, grey pony-tailed “progressive” college professors brainwashed them into believing.

So much so that the Obama White House is conducting a foreign policy based on the unfounded fairy tale that if westerners are just nice enough to people who will kill young girls for wanting to go to school, then Islamofascists will like and forgive the west for not being Islamists and not attack the west.

These “progressives” are the same group who believe the vaporous illusion that Islamofascists as reasonable people with whom it is possible to negotiate peace.

They are also the same crowd that insists on fomenting the lie that Conservatives are waging a war on women because Conservatives believe a thirty year old Georgetown University law school graduate should buy her own contraceptives.

Naturally, “progressives” remain steadfastly incapable of understanding why Conservatives find them a bit lacking in the perception, common sense and moral center departments.

You cannot fix stupid, but you can vote it out of office.

Be sure to vote it out of every single office at every level of government on November 6, 2012.

http://mjfellright.wordpress.com/2012/10/18/progressives-no-puzzle/

Romney’s War on Women? Maybe Not.

romney women

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.

 

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

Tonight on the Dark Side with Kira Davis

Jennapolaroid3

6/24/12 Tonight we welcome Jenna Soards from Thisslutvotes.com. Jenna is an activist against the “war on women” and has branded herself as a “slut” for 30 days as an experiment in attitudes toward/against women. Jenna recently attended the #SayVagina rally in Michigan and we’ll talk about her site, her experiment and what she considers to be anti-woman legislation.

Also, weekly predictions! Don’t miss this show. Tonight at 10pm E.T., 7p.m. Pacific on the CDNews network on BlogTalk radio.

« Older Entries