There is a Republican candidate running for the United States Senate in Indiana by the name of Richard Mourdock. By now we should have all heard his remarks (Oct,. 24) about a woman who is raped, resulting in a pregnancy. The guy said that it is God's intention that this woman should not have an abortion in these circumstances. As if this was not a shovel full of manure thrown into the mouths of each of us who believes that not only does a woman have a right to choose and control her own body, but certainly have the unquestionable right to have an abortion when rape results in pregnancy, more salt is thrown into the wound when the Republican candidate for president, Willard Mitt Romney, has aired a commercial supporting Mr. Mourdock's candidacy! Romney's campaign will also not take down the commercial. In the "three strikes and you're out" category, Romney then goes on to say (in the commercial) that Mourdock is needed in the Senate to be the 51st vote to repeal Obamacare!
Moreover, Romney and his sidekick, Paul Ryan (Robin -- to Romney being Batman, I guess) keep saying that Obama wants to cut $716 billion from Medicare -- obviously to frighten off seniors: "Say it ain't so, Joe." Well, it "ain't" so, since not only does Ryan (Romney supports Ryan's plan too) use the same figure as Obama but Obama's cut is not intended to take away one iota of benefit from seniors under Medicare. The cuts Obama proposes come from eliminating a massive subsidy to insurers and gradually reducing the rate of growth in payments to some providers, writes Kate Pickert of TIME. In return, Obamacare -- according to Pickert -- will provide preventive care at 100 percent for Medicare beneficiaries and the gap in the Medicare prescription drug coverage (Part D) will slowly close over time. To be certain, Romney's statement that the Affordable Care decimating the Medicare program as we know it is completely and utterly false!
So what is left for undecided voters with less than two weeks to go before the election? In one corner, to use boxing-ring parlance, we have a candidate who backs a politician wanting to take away a woman's right to choose, and, in particular, a woman's right to choose in the case of rape, whose vote, if elected, will be the deciding one to repeal Obamacare and its benefits that includes taking away Medicare benefits and costing seniors money they cannot afford to spend or do not have. In the other corner, we have a president who understood the millions of citizens that were uninsured and underinsured, wanting to obtain and maintain their health from a system they could not either afford or access. That person did something about it that we all call Obamacare. This person also saw the needs of seniors who could not be without their health either, and took steps to ensure Medicare would continue with the same benefits. And as a strong and committed leader, this person would also never want a politician who wants to take away a woman's right to choose yet alone one who wants to take away the right of millions of Americans to be healthy and remain so.
So, whom would you vote for on Nov. 6? The answer should be clear.