Monday, August 20, 2012

It's Dangerous to be a Woman in a Republican World

Um, I'm sorry, what did you just say Mr. Akin? Legitimate rape? And what did you just say, Mr. Trump? Women don't get what's going on politically? Actually, Trump, we do. Which is why Republican popularity with women is in the TOILET!

You'd think in the year 2012, we women wouldn't have to really be worried about our health and civil rights. But hey, here we are. Republicans on both state and federal levels are eagerly chipping away at all the rights so many fought so hard for. The utter insanity of it all is draped in sheer ridiculousness.

 I still don't understand what my gender has done to offend Republicans so badly. Is it that we stepped out of the kitchen and into the workforce? We show up in the classroom and the office? We make our own decisions? We think for ourselves? All of the above? Yes. It is all the above. We have shaken off control and they don't like it.

We need to be incredibly worried that Republicans are trying their hardest to redefine rape. How can one even do that? Rape is RAPE. According to, rape is defined as, "the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse." What's not to understand about that? What will they try to "redefine" next? It affects all of us.

Republicans seem to have an obsession with hurting women. Whether it's limiting funding for Planned Parenthood, suggesting well woman exams and other female health coverage in the Affordable Care Act is an affront to their religious freedom, or galloping into congress in 2010 and immediately beginning to gut abortion rights, it seems a bit...bizarre. And then I think, "Oh wait, they don't like when women have a voice." In our 2012 elections, we have the chance to make that voice heard loud, proud and clear.

 Here in Wisconsin, our senate election is incredibly crucial. Tommy Thompson has made it clear he intends to roll back abortion rights as much as he can and help Republicans waste more time and money by destroying the Affordable Care Act. Tammy Baldwin will continue to stand with women, just as she always has. She supports Planned Parenthood, she's pro-choice and she supports women's health initiatives. We need her in the US senate to ensure women's abortion rights will be protected for years to come. And do I need to mention the presidential election? Remember, Paul Ryan wants to give rapists legal rights over their victims. Need I say more?


  1. And not one Republican supported what that dummy said but don't let facts get in your way

  2. Erick Erickson's the editor-in-chief of Red State

    @EWErickson: Todd Akin will withdraw from the MO Senate race.

  3. 12:45, do you have a link to that claim?

    Ryan co-sponsored Akin's legislation. Good luck trying to put that toothpaste back in the tube.

    Also, shouldn't there be a 72-hour waiting period before Akin can abort his campaign?

    What about getting an ultra-sound first?

  4. Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal at 3:22 CST

    "Under Fire, Akin Vows to Stay in Race"

    Ryan-Akin 2012

  5. I refuse to give the GOP any credit because they were forced by a large public outcry to disavow this jerk. I'm sure many agree with him in private.

  6. Every Republican in the House voted for the "forcible rape," distinction in H.R.3

    Along with Paul Ryan, here are the other Wisconsin co-sponsors:

    Duffy, Sean [R-WI7]

    Ribble, Reid [R-WI8]

    Sensenbrenner, James [R-WI5]

    Petri, Thomas “Tom” [R-WI6]

  7. Let's not get all pompous about Wisconsin -- one of the last states with woman suffrage, and only when forced to abide by a federal amendment, and one of the last states with a woman in Congress at all, and not until the eve of this millennium. Thank you, Dane County and Tammy for not delaying the 20th century any longer in Wisconsin, into the 21st century -- but we have yet to see a woman elected statewide to Congress from Wisconsin.

    Nor ought we get all pompous about so-called librul guyz, whether in Wisconsin (cough, Obey) or elsewhere. . . . After all, which presidential candidate said that women ought to make their reproductive decisions with their husbands and their ministers?

    (a) Romney (b) Obama

  8. 9:26

    Better quality trolling than we're accustomed to from mustbewhitesupremacist.

    Don't play defense about the words that's killing you, "rape," and "forcible rape."

    Since Romney and Obama are both pro-choice tools of the 1%, aside from releasing their tax returns, on what issues is there any daylight between them?

    1. Why, because he found a way to show hate for WI while disagreeing?

  9. Truth is not trolling.

    Can you cite the law enacted in Wisconsin according women suffrage prior to 1920? No, you cannot. Can you cite the women elected to Congress from Wisconsin -- although Wisconsin women ran for Congress since 1922 -- prior to Baldwin? No, you cannot.

    As for why Capper opted to include the art, the headline on woman suffrage finally enacted in all of this land and thus in Wisconsin, ask him. I don't see what woman suffrage has to do with rape -- as men can be raped -- but he raised it.

    As for the words rape and forcible rape -- why your air quotes? -- the terms must be killing you, as I did not use them. I understand that all rape is forcible rape. Why don't you?

    As for your last question, I have no idea what the h*ll you're talking about on that, either. Explain.

    And then stop deflecting from the issue and address that the war on women is, sadly, not solely a problem among Republicans. The 2008 election certainly showed us that we have a lot of battles still to be waged with librul guyz, so the chortling today is as stupid as the Stupak Amendment -- when a president signed it without raising his issue today that men ought not decide about women's bodies.

    Anon 9:26

    1. Well, if you want truth, you might want to start with getting simple facts straight, such as the author of this article.

    2. Sorry to blame you for this, Capper.

      The truth will not set Meg or John Foust free, though, nor me, until we all face that there are degrees to the problem of the war on women. That Democrats benefit by being less appalling than the Ryans and Akins is nothing, I repeat, about which true libruls ought to boast.

      The Ryans and Akins will get enough women to the polls, but that also is not the same as winning the war on us. Some of us put our priorities not on the polls nor on the pols and their egos but on saving our daughters from having to go through it all again -- because we're too old and tired to do it all again for you.

    3. Jeesh, another cx: Make that Meg or John Casper.

      I'm too disgusted today with this country and this state even to see straight. . . .

      Off, I go, to research again about retirement in Canada, Australia, anywhere but this misbegotten mistake of a place.

    4. Well, now I don't see any comments by John Foust either.

      But to your point, no one is saying that the Democrats are perfect. They know full well that I, nor any of my colleagues, will cut them slack when they do ill.

      But to do this "the Dems are just as bad" is a typical troll technique, as well as non sequitur to the whole point, which is that the Republican's war on women is indefensible. Yet, you try to defend it.

      I would think that a true "librul" would want to take steps forward in bringing our society out of the Dark Ages instead of having tantrums about who is worse.

    5. Actually, Australia treats women worse, so I wouldn't waste my time there.

    6. I posted the photo for the bottom headline. When women vote in November, President Obama and progressive house candidates will be reelected and we will have congressional victory.

  10. Replies
    1. Thanks! Looks like this left a few people rather peeved. Oops! ;)

  11. Meg, you're a great addition to the blogging community!

  12. Anon 9:26,

    Can't wait for your response to capper at 10:35.