Tuesday, July 16, 2013

Republicans Want To Open Another Front In Their War Against Women Over In The Senate?


Sunday on Meet The Press, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid basically told the Republicans to "bring it on" if they want to try passing more abortion banning laws. It's easy for someone like Marco Rubio to act like a big shot around crazy Hate Talk Radio hosts and demand a vote to ban women's Choice when he thinks there'll never be a vote. But now... awkward.

Reid told Meet the Press viewers he doesn't see taking up the GOP's latest demand for another vote to end choice as a pressing problem the Senate should deal with, but said he'd let them have their vote, basically to get them to stop whining. "I think we should deal with the problems that affect this country. We need to do something to help the working class and stop worrying about fringe issues... Let's do things the vast majority of Americans think we should deal with." So will Republicans be happy now and start cooperating instead of sabotaging the smooth functioning of government? Not a chance.

First off, sabotaging is all they do. Secondly, some of these Republicans from outside the South would rather not have to vote on an abortion ban. Susan Collins (R-ME) is up for reelection in 2014. She'll vote with the Democrats against the crazy bill, but will that get the drums beating among the loons in the Maine Tea Party for a primary against her? Voting against women's Choice won't hurt in places where patriarchy is ingrained. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), John Cornyn (R-TX), Jim Risch (R-ID), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Thad Cochran (R-MS), Jim Inhofe (the Google candidate from Oklahoma), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Tim Scott (R-SC), and, in a slightly more complicated way, Lindsey Graham (R-SC) will be depending on old white male voters-- and the women who do what they're told-- who are firmly rooted in the 1950's to get them back into the Senate. Voting to further whittle away at women's Choice goes over just fine among their bases.

But it could hurt McConnell back in Kentucky, make putting together a winning coalition for Graham in South Carolina trickier and hurt Republican prospects in Iowa, North Carolina, Alaska, Montana, and South Dakota, states they need to win if they're going to take over the Senate.

So why did I use the "others" video of MSNBC hosts led by mild-mannered Thomas Roberts talking about Republican oppression of minorities-- and, in the case of women, a minority only in some people's minds? Well, I'm going to leave that for everyone else to figure out.

Senate Minority Leader McConnell (R-KY) is an old-fashioned, women-hating closeted homosexual. He's adamantly opposed every bit of legislation that enforces equality for women. Recently he was caught lying about his vicious and persistent opposition to the Violence Against Women bills that have passed Congress with large bipartisan majorities-- but with nothing but nasty opposition for the evil, vicious women-hating closet case. Steve Benen didn't let the lie pass unnoticed.
While last week he deflected a question about his previous votes against the Violence Against Women Act, today, McConnell explained that he's a longtime supporter, but preferred an alternative to the one advanced by Democrats.

"Actually I voted for a much stronger version of the Violence Against Women Act than the one that ended up passing the Senate," McConnell said.

Opposing the Violence Against Women Act is bad. Lying about it adds insult to injury.

First, McConnell isn't a "longtime supporter" of VAWA. He voted against it 1994 when the legislation was first proposed, and then voted against its reauthorization this year. He voted against it in 2012, too. I believe the technical term for someone who votes against an idea over and over again is "opponent."

Second, there was no "stronger version." Democrats and Republicans reached a bipartisan agreement on VAWA, it came to the floor, and it passed with 78 votes-- every member of the Democratic caucus plus 23 Republicans. McConnell was part of a small minority who opposed it anyway. After the vote, he issued no press statement to explain his vote.
Will Kentucky voters recognize Miss McConnell as an "other" too?

Labels: , , , ,


At 10:06 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The rhetorical question: "Will Kentucky voters recognize Miss McConnell as an "other" too?"

That depends on the financial depth of the pockets of the dropped trousers of the good ole boys with whom McConnell seriously "campaigns."

John Puma


Post a Comment

<< Home