GOP Women Shamelessly Accuse Dems of Being Anti-Woman
Last weekend on the House floor, unruly Republicans literally shouted down members of the Democratic Women's Caucus who were attempting to speak in support of health care reform. It was a shameful display, which Rep. Mary Jo Kilroy (D-OH) condemned as "rude," "disrespectful," and "sexist." Watch a mash-up video of the incident here.
Yet, writing in the Washington Times today, Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) had the audacity to complain that pro-reform Democrats don't care about women:
As congresswomen, we think we should be listening to and speaking out for women.
If Democrats in Congress and the administration had been listening to women, they would not have drafted and passed a reform bill that takes power away from women and gives it to federal bureaucrats. Today, we, women - working with a trusted medical professional - guide which treatments are best for our family, from flu shots and hormones to heart stents and long-term care facilities. If H.R. 3962 ultimately becomes law, these decisions will increasingly be made by bureaucrats, statisticians and actuaries.
The Pelosi health care plan aims to have an impartial, all-knowing federal government make decisions that cannot be trusted to mere housewives (and their greedy, small town doctors).
For McMorris Rodgers and Jenkins to gripe about anyone disrespecting women is laughable. In addition to last weekend's theatrics, every single Republican member of the House voted for the so-called Stupak amendment, which will impose extreme restrictions on a woman's right make reproductive choices. The vote came a day after one of their conservative colleagues actually compared women to smokers in order to justify gender-based discrimination on the part of insurance companies.
As for the merits of their complaint, it has been made before and it's just not true. Under reform, there will not be an "all-knowing federal government making decisions" that would normally be made by patients. (The claim comes from a distortion of comparative effectiveness research, an existing practice that will not take choices away but rather will lead to better options.)
Later in the column, McMorris Rodgers and Jenkins cite problems with the H1N1 vaccine as evidence that the government can't "make good medical decisions." However, both women -- and all but 5 of their Republican colleagues -- voted against funding the vaccine.
Despite all evidence to the contrary, McMorris Rodgers and Jenkins want us to believe that Republicans are sticking up for women. But the fact is, the congresswomen and their party have consistently opposed providing families with better health care options. Why would anybody trust them now?
Crossposted at Media Matters Action Network
Nancy L. Cohen: 10 Reasons Why the Stupak-Pitts Amendment Has to Go
Even if some Democrats who voted for the amendment did so because of deep convictions, the main thrust of the measure is to condemn women for being sexually active.
Geoffrey R. Stone: Church and State in JFK's America
Whatever happened to the America that JFK believed in? The America in which "no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials"?
Mehmet Oz, M.D.: Real Health Care Reform: What's Next?
Health care reform is not just about who pays. It must also address what we are paying for. And we have to start paying for health rather than treating sickness.
Anna Burger: We Object: Republicans and Women's Health
For years, Republicans have attacked women's health care policy every chance they have gotten. Of course, you start to expect this kind of behavior from a party whose caucus is 90% male.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Stockholm syndrome....
Notable and honorable exceptions exist -- I watched Dede Scozzafava on Rachel's show, and although I disagree with her politics, she was a dignified, committed, concerned citizen. But overall, by the very nature of the GOP, GOP women have to be shameless just to be in the fraternity of rich old white guys, at least if they have any pretense of caring about women's rights. So it's hardly surprising that they have to add hypocrisy -- or even MORE hypocrisy -- to their shamelessness about the Stupak amendment and other attacks on the right to choose and other women's rights issues by attacking democrats on these issues.
Many democrats have also covered themselves with shame on these issues recently, unfortunately. The Stupak amendment should have gotten nowhere and been summarily dismissed for the unconstitutional baloney it is. The only way Democrats will get the moral high ground back on issues important to women is to reject completely, aggressively, and publicly ALL attacks on women's rights (which attacks, of course, negatively affect every other human's rights).
Lets see,the Democrats are against Women.
How about 176 RepugniCAN'T Representatives,Ms McMorris-Rodgers and Ms Jenkins included,
voted for the Stupac Amendment.
Or 30 RepugniCAN'T Senators voted against Sen.Al Franken's Amendment,that supported
a rape victim's right to have her day in court if they work for govt.contractor or sub contractor
at the time the assault was committed.
Yes sir,Those RepugniCAN'Ts really stand up for womens rights,boy!
I'm impressed.
I'm still mad about the catholic' being involved
Um, didn't the Repub women engage in shameless hypocrisy when calling out only the Dems who didn't vote unanimously for the Stupak amendment, but all the GOP sure did and the GOP women say nothing about THAT.
Women are not liked much in the GOP party. Note how they are treated, how only the attractive ones are used to venture out and charm the public. Women with brains need not apply. A Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, Terry Fraison, all relatively intellectually challanged real wing nuts are tutored, handed talking points, unable to act independently, need guidance by the Limbaugh's, Bill Cristol's, and behind the scenes Svengali's. These woman are not bright enough to function without handlers and they are pawns for the GOP Senators and Congressmen. You won't find any strong independent, extremely intelligent and independent women like Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Debbie Wasserman, Amy Klobuchar, and countless other strong women democrats, on the Republican side. In fact, you wil find few women of any stature in the Republican party. Wives aren't treated that well either. GOP remains a party of rich, white, chauvenistic, protestant, men, always was, always will be........
Women who give up their rights are just plain stupid. After women worked so to hard to have rights like Roe v. Wade (incest and rape leading problems at the time, with no laws to prosecute the perps); harrassement in the workplace; right to credit; etc. one would think women would not settle back to that era when men made ALL the decisions. It becomes unbelievable when the women of the 21st century now have to protect ourselves from the women in Congress because of their religious beliefs.
Separation of church and State has to prevail, or we could find ourselves living in a third world, like the middle east. When citizens are told what to do with their own bodies, those citizens no longer care what the world has to offer them , and we will slide further backward than any church can preach about. There are legitimate health reasons why abortion does need to be in a health care bill, and Stupak just shot down any chance for a woman to purchase insurance from a company willing to offer it. What will be shot down by the goverment next? Viagra is in the bill, but birth control pills are not and neither is abortion. Who's rights are being denied in this effort?
Abortion is legal, and so must the right to purchase health insurance with one's own money be also.
Fanned.
Church should not be relevant to Health Care. The State should provide an Option to high priced Health Insurance not only to keep the providers honest, but that it is the right thing for Government do. Provide for the Common Welfare.
,
But Viagra is for men, so of course it's in the bill. What a sad state of affairs when we as women find our selves taking two steps back instead of moving forward. Though I think Laura Bush was is a charming and judicious person (well, except for one big and important decision she made when choosing a husband), she was no proponent for equal rights for women. She knew her place and kept it. Michelle Obama is another story. And with Hillary in the government, it would seem that we should be back in business. But the conservative storm that has swept through the country has stripping women of certain rights as one of it's aims. The charming women who are heading their movement, namely Bachman and Palin, have no idea what feminism means. For them, it's nice to have a good job where you repeat the same old song and dance over and over again ab nauseum. Unfortunately, the white guys who feel threatened by the election of our President, have women next on the list of who they'll keep down to maintain some sense of dignity. They've never felt the pride of equality, I suppose. Their sole objective is power. And money. And there will always be women who are enablers. The same men who want to keep women down, don't mind putting them in an important office in a nice skirt to help them in getting what they want.
Um, didn't the dems, all by themselves, just pass the biggest piece of anti-abortion legislation in recent history? Please explain to me how that is pro-women.
The Stupak amendment is not law yet.
The Stupak amendment and the health care bill it's attached to now goes to the Senate, where the amendment will likely be rejected. And it received 176 republican votes in the House, so the "dems" didn't "pass" it "all by themselves", did they now?
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2009/roll884.xml
The amendment wasn't up for being voted into law by itself. The vote that mattered and has a chance to become law is HCR - you know, the one Pelosi voted for?
The Dems are the ones that passed the Health Care bill. Only one Republican voted for it, so yes the Dems alone passed the biggest piece of anti-abortion legislation in recent history.
So the Democrats were not coerced into accepting this amendment? No Republican voted for the Stupak amendment? The Republicans are absolutely opposed to restrictions on abortion? The Democrats could have had the larger bill pass without accepting the Stupak amendment?
As Barney Frank so wisely asked, on what planet do you spend most of your time?
eddie too has a problem with staying on point.This article is about the hypocrisy of two RepugniCAN'T female Rep.s trying to accuse
the Democratic Party as being anti Womens Rights .He should read the whole article.The facts are all there.
so the anti-abortion legislation congressional dems just passed is now pro-women?
What does the Amendment say?It says No government money will be used to fund
abortions.Not that you can't have one.Get you facts straight.
You've got a gripe alright.See the amendment makes it through conference.
Laws can be amended too.
They say if health care reform becomes law, treatment will be decided by actuaries ?
As it stands, the uninsured and underinsured, those declined and denied by insurance companies
are more at risk at being seen in a mortuary, not by an actuary.
Kind of strange isn't it. all the things that these fo o ls talk about being afraid of exist right now within the insurance companies.
Hello out there.
who will decide what government provided health insurance will cover? are there really people out there who think that individuals who use government provided health insurance will get to decide what kind of coverage the government run health insurance will provide?
i suggest they are living in an alternate reality.
The govenment isn't providing health insurance with this bill.Perhaps it's you
that's living in an alternate reality.Read the Bill .Do your homework.
Nice try. Wow, you people have no clue what is going on.
Do you have health insurance? You might want to start your research by reading your policy and looking nto what insurance companies do to people who get sick.
So long as the only time Democrats think about women is over abortion, more and more of us will turn to other support systems. That debate is so stale it stinks up every woman's right to vote on other issues that, frankly, affect her life a great deal more directly.
Democrats have, for years, whipped up a frenzy and laid claim to the higher ground over abortion rights. Well, not all of us are consumed by this issue. Most of us figured out alternative approaches to birth control. And many of us are working singles with children or working for our own retirement plans or losing our homes due to the recession. We would like to vote on something other than this.
The problem is reinforced by the attack mode of the Democrats against GOP women, which looks precisely like the progressive attack against OUR favored candidate in the primaries, Hillary Clinton. Did anyone think we wouldn't notice the same charges, attitudes, smear jobs, and adjectives?
Or let's take the latest hot topic, Carrie Prejean. What Democrat stood up for her against her BF's despicable action? He escapes being the same as Letterman's blackmailer ONLY because he skipped the step of offering her first dibs on buying the tape. Or do you imagine that TMZ accidentally found the tape?
When I see Democratic women actually standing up for women, regardless of some political difference, then I'll pay attention. Untl then, I've slipped the noose of abortion rights off my neck.
Who are you really, Cathy or Lynn?
Are you saying that the Democrats as a whole decided it would be a good idea to muddy the waters of the health care bill by introducing restrictions on abortion in a fashion that is completely contrary to the position of the majority of Democratic legislators?
I can understand being angry at this amendment being added. I cannot understand taking out your anger on the people who are trying to protect your rights. It is not like they aren't fighting against a vociferous opposition. Your weak support for that fight doesn't make our side any stronger.
Little Carrie set herslf up.People who live in glass houses........
The Genesis of “Pro-Life” Fervor
“Those who cry out the loudest against abortion are the ones born of unwanted pregnancies, or aborted in a previous life, and the experience is stamped in their characters. You see them picketing abortion clinics during the morning drive by hours. They look like zombies, marching up and down, a super serious, wrenched-from-the- pre-birth womb look on their faces. Always, in any conversation, they slip in their personal driving force at the end. 'Would you like that to happen to you?’" Because it happened to them!” – Michael Stephen Levinson (slightly modified)
I think these people are genuinely, but subconsciously, terrorized of their own annihilation which, therefore, drives them to extinguish the pro-choice decision (they had no choice). The primary inner need is to protect their own existence. Having this protoplasmic memory stamped into pre-birth development will inevitably lead to psychological distortions of life. A friend said to me recently, "If only they could cry."
Uh...what....?
I am so sick and tired of these people claiming that government bureaucrats will be making health care decisions. That is nothing but BS. It's the health insurance bureaucrats that are making these decisions now and they are looking for any way they can to deny claims. Doctors are fighting with insurance companies all the time to try to get the best care for their patients.
Single payer is the only answer to our health care crisis. Unfortunately our elected "representatives" are bought and paid for by the insurance industry so that won't happen.
Until we get corporate money out of our elections the American people will always lose.
Amen.
This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.
Amen.
I agree Single Payer for alll.....if they had asked for it then they could have lower to PO and it would be done by now....
Have you heard that All of our elected officials have abortion included in their insurance policies and it has been that way for so long they had to call and see how long
Now they are going to have it taken out of their policies ......
their all hypocrites >>>>
The very fact that parties agree that there should be no public funding for abortion shows how far to the right we have moved. It is now accepted practice for a church famous for its ordained child molesters to lecture us on morals.
This is part of the process for getting a bill passed. This isn't some high school election where the most popular thing wins, it is a fight to the death with the monied interests that run this country and spend a lot of time and money brainwashing people and buying votes.
If one of the parties could have half a hope of staying in power if it came out in favor of public funding for abortion, then it might do so. Which party do you think that would be? How can you give them the courage to do it? Threatening to bring the other party back into power seems like an awfully contradictory way to behave.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
