COOPER CHECKS CONWAY ON ABORTION

Kellyanne Conway, like other Donald Trump campaign representatives, has gained a reputation for making wildly fact-free claims to defend her boss.

But she’s been doing that for years, as videos newly unearthed by the Democratic Coalition Against Trump have revealed.

Conway made the cable TV news rounds in 2012 defending a client, Missouri Senate candidate Todd Akin, after the former Republican congressman claimed that women’s bodies could somehow naturally prevent pregnancies from occurring in cases of “legitimate rape.”

VIDEO COURTESY OF CNN



The GOP pollster tried to change the subject during an Aug. 21, 2012, appearance on CNN by falsely claiming there’d been a rise in the number of sex-selection abortions in the United States — and that Democrats promoted the practice.

“The Washington Post reported on Aug. 10 that there are Democrats who are going to the convention in Charlotte who want their plank expanded,” Conway said. “They feel that it’s too draconian. It doesn’t allow for partial birth abortion bans. It doesn’t ban sex selection. You’ve got all these little baby girls being killed just because they’re girls in this country.”

Host Anderson Cooper interrupted incredulously: “Wait, what? Excuse me, where is that happening?”

Conway said Planned Parenthood data, which she said had been collected in a Guttmacher Institute report, showed that sex-selection abortions were not uncommon — and she urged the U.S. Congress to pass the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act.

“The House just passed a bill to ban that,” Conway said. “I’m not sure it ever went to the Senate, and I’m sure President Obama would veto it if it was put on his desk.”

Critics say that bill, which lawmakers considered earlier this year, was a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” that twists feminism and uses racial stereotypes about Asian immigrants to restrict abortion rights.

“But statistically, there’s not really much evidence that that is actually occurring in the United States,” Cooper said. “Amongst some immigrant groups in small numbers it may be occurring but in no statistical measure is it significant.”

Conway urged Cooper to look at Guttmacher Institute’s statistics, so during a commercial break, he did.

“Before the break, Kellyanne, you mentioned the Guttmacher Institute information on sex-selective abortion in the United States,” Cooper said. “Here’s what they actually say in a May 30 press release titled ‘Sex Selective Abortion Bans: A Disingenuous New Strategy to Limit Women’s Access to Abortion.'”

“The study acknowledges the practice does go on overseas, as we mentioned, and perhaps in certain Asian-American communities in the United States in small numbers,” Cooper continued. “But, quote, ‘In the United States, meanwhile, there is limited data indicating that sex-selective abortion may be occurring in some Asian communities. Although the U.S. sex ratio at 1.05 males for every female is squarely within biologically normal parameters.’ So I just wanted to put that out there.”

NFTOS 

STAFF WRITER

CNN’S NELL HUGHES HITS NEW ALL TIME LOW

Screw it that Trump got blasted yesterday by the top 50 GOP top security staff.

The big news is that CNN’s GOP “political analyst” Scottie Nell Hughes –has gone full Monty bat shit crazy!

Hughes argued on yesterday that pregnant women who have contracted the Zika virus should be banned from having abortions because birth defects were “nothing new.”

Sen. Marco Rubio insisted to Politico in a recent interview that abortion should be banned with no exceptions including cases where the Zika virus would cause the child to be born with severe microcephaly.

On Monday, Democratic strategist Maria Cardona told CNN’s Chris Cuomo that Rubio’s stance reflected the beliefs of many men in the Republican Party.

“What Republicans did was they poisoned the [Zika] bill with efforts to try to cut back funding for those [reproductive health] clinics and to cut back funding on Obamacare,” Cardona explained. “They really weren’t interested in fixing this issue. They were interested in playing politics and Marco Rubio’s comment underscores why.”

Hughes agreed that microcephaly was a “devastating disease,” but added that children with birth defects were “nothing new.”

“We don’t have the research, we don’t know what Zika is going to do,” she opined. “And Sen. Rubio is doing the correct thing. One out of every 33 babies in the United States right now is born with a birth defect.”

“We’re going to sit there and terminate a life because you’re possibly going to be born with [microcephaly]?” Hughes asked. “I think that’s actually very hypocritical of the Democrat Party.”

“Abortion is definitely not the answer for a way to sit there and cure this disease.”

Scottie Nell Hughes, you are today’s most despicable human in the world! Congrats numb-nuts!

NFTOS

Blogger-In-Chief

Roger West

BEE GOES AFTER MANUFACURED ABORTION ISSUES

Samantha Bee continued her history lesson on the evangelical religious right — and their symbiotic relationship with the Republican Party.

“Last week, we took a look at the religious right — those coveted evangelical voters that conservatives spent decades pandering to only to be dumped just before November prom for a heretical billionaire bully who only says the word “God” when he is ejaculating on a pile of money,” Bee began.

VIDEO COURTESY OF TBS

“Many people think the new religious right arose as a response to the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision. But that’s not true”

Religious studies professor Randall Balmer explained that leaders like Jerry Falwell and Paul Wirke were looking for ways to extend their power in the American political process, following the founding of the Moral Majority in 1979.

Balmer explained, “They held a conference call to discuss the prospect of other political activities. Several people discussed possible issues and finally a voice on the end of one of the lines said, ‘How about abortion?'”

Bee then interviewed author and filmmaker Frank Schaeffer, who claimed to be instrumental in the founding of the modern anti-abortion movement.

“One of the things that I did back in the day when I was young was help found, start, begin what became known as the ‘pro-life movement.’ It is the single greatest regret of my life. We made a film series called ‘Whatever Happened to the Human Race‘ featuring my dad — Francis Schaeffer — and Dr. C. Everett Coop,” Schaeffer said.

“Most evangelical leaders didn’t want anything to do with it. They wanted to just preach Jesus. They thought politics was dirty. They didn’t want anything to do with it. We had to talk them into it.”

Schaeffer then explained how the GOP got involved in making the Moral Majority’s new anti-abortion agenda legitimate.

“One of the people who helped us do that was Jack Kemp. He brought in 50 senators and congressmen including Henry Hyde and Bob Dole and a bunch of other people and gave it respectability.”

NFTOS
STAFF WRITER

GOP’S MOST DISGUTING WOMAN DOUBLES DOWN ON CLOWNSTICK’S ABORTION POSITION

Ann Coultergeist this week defended GOP hopeful Donald Trump’s remark that women deserved “some form of punishment” for having illegal abortions.

During an interview on Monday, Wisconsin radio host Charlie Sykes argued that Trump had not “spent thirty seconds thinking about abortion before he was asked by Chris Matthews” about what would happen to women who had abortions if the practice was outlawed.

“When you start asking your guy these questions about policy, there’s no there there,” Sykes told Coulter, according to a transcript provided by Real Clear Politics.

“That’s crazy,” Coulter replied. “I thought the full exchange was fabulous.”

“It was a stupid hypothetical question that has absolutely no bearing on what a president does,” she added. “It is like asking a president, ‘If you were a tree, what tree would you be?'”

Sykes pointed out that Coulter had once said that she didn’t care if Donald Trump “wants to perform abortions in the White House” as long as he built a wall on the U.S. border.

“It is known as hyperbole, Charlie,” Coulter shot back. “This is what I mean. Suddenly the conservative movement has forgotten the meaning of hyperbole. They won’t criticize anything. Any misstep by Trump is completely blown up, even though it is nothing.”

Coultergeist is a parasite whose fifteen minutes of fame was up ten years ago. Her relevance to politics has fallen on deaf ears.

Talk about the moral decay at lower levels. You judge a tree by its fruit. Is it healthy or is it sucking up the life of everything around it to survive? Ann is the type of woman whom suffers from diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain.

It’s been awhile, but congratulations’ Ann, you are today’s most putrid human in the world! Enjoy numb-nuts!

NFTOS
Blogger-In-Chief

Roger West

YES HE ACTUALLY SAID THAT!

Fuckface Von Clownstick [Donald Trump] said on Wednesday that women who had abortions should face “some form of punishment” if Republicans were successful in banning the practice.

During a town hall event that set to air on MSNBC Wednesday night, host Chris Matthews insisted that Trump could not dodge the question of how to enforce an abortion ban.

VIDEO COURTESY OF MSNBC

“Look, people in certain parts of the Republican Party, conservative Republicans, would say, ‘Yes, it should,’” Trump replied, according to a transcript obtained by Bloomberg. “I would say it’s a very serious problem and it’s a problem we have to decide on. Are you going to send them to jail?” 

“There has to be some form of punishment,” he said. 

“For the woman?” Matthews pressed. 

“Yeah,” Clownstick replied, adding that the punishment would “have to be determined.”

“They’ve set the law and frankly the judges, you’re going to have a very big election coming up for that reason because you have judges where it’s a real tipping point and with the loss of Scalia, who was a very strong conservative, this presidential election is going to be very important,” the candidate opined. “When you say what’s the law, nobody knows what the law is going to be. It depends on who gets elected.”

VIDEO COURTESY OF MSNBC



While Clownstick walked back his inane comment hours later, there is no doubt in this bloggers mind that Clownstick’s cognitive thought process indeed meant women should be punished for having an abortion. This rhetoric falls in true step with the conservative narrative.

While this talk is dangerous, we should be accustomed to the shock and awe psycho babble bullshit of Clownstick. Maybe Clownstick could waterboard the women for their choice? Clownstick often suffers from diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain. Foot in mouth disease, it’s what conservatives suffer from.

The abortion problem is a plethora, but the bottom line is - neither Clownstick, nor any other radical white pasty man – should it be their business to dictate to a woman what her personhood business is.

If it’s your religious belief, I could careless, keep your religion out of my business and women’s personhood. If it is indeed wrong to have an abortion, one, don’t have one, two, it’s your creators job to deal with it not yours!

The last I saw, women had the right to choice, until as such that the choice is no longer theirs, mind your own fucking business!

NFTOS
Blogger-In-Chief

Roger West

UNTIL IT HAPPENS TO THEM

MAHER: "CLOWNSTICK'S FATHER A ORANGUTAN FROM BORNEO WHO SPOKE NO ENGLISH"

Bill Maher says republicans only care about an issue - only when it happens to them.

Take a look:

VIDEO COURTESY OF HBO - THE EMPATHY GAP


Funny how that is isn't it readers?



NFTOS
Blogger-In-Chief
Roger West

“I AM A WARRIOR FOR THE BABIES”

The man who was arrested for killing three people at a Planned Parenthood clinic last month appears to have admitted his guilt, calling himself a “warrior for the babies” and saying that there should be no trial.

Robert Lewis Dear was scheduled to be formally charged on Wednesday. According to a CBS reporter, he made an outburst in the Colorado courtroom before the charges were read — one that strongly hints at a potential motive for his crimes.

“I am guilty. There will be no trial. I am a warrior for the babies,” Dear reportedly said.

“You’ll never know the amount of blood I saw in that place,” he continued, according to a reporter who was in the courtroom. “Seal the truth, kill the babies, that’s what Planned Parenthood does.”

The news of Dear’s outburst comes after several weeks of speculation about why he went on a shooting spree at a Colorado Springs health clinic the day after Thanksgiving. The mainstream media and U.S. lawmakers have been reluctant to label the crime as a terrorist act, saying that it’s important to wait for more information.

Reproductive rights proponents, on the other hand, have been insistent about the fact that Dear fits into a larger pattern of violence targeted at abortion clinics. They say he was clearly influenced by extreme rhetoric stemming from the anti-choice community, and have been pressuring the government to classify the shooting as domestic terrorism.

There are some other pieces of evidence pointing to Dear’s anti-abortion ideology. According to recent reports, Dear asked for directions to the clinic on the day of the shooting. And after he was in custody, he told investigators, “No more baby parts” — an apparent reference to inflammatory videos released this summer that accuse the national women’s health provider of illegally selling fetal tissue.

It’s not uncommon for anti-abortion activists to refer themselves as “warriors” for the cause. The language choice reflects the fact that many abortion opponents see themselves as engaged in spiritual warfare to rid society of the procedure.

In a statement released Wednesday, Vicki Cowart, the president of Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, emphasized that Planned Parenthood’s doors will remain open. But she also issued a call to tone down extreme rhetorical attacks against the national women’s health organization.

“We know that words matter. It is time to put an end to the dangerous rhetoric that has permeated our political conversations,” Cowart said. “Enough is enough — this violence, whether inflicted with words or with weapons, cannot become our normal.”

[cross posted from thinkprogress]

NFTOS
STAFF WRITER

YOUNG TURK EVICERATES CONSERVATIVES

Young Turks host Ana Kasparian ripped conservatives on Tuesday who denied any link between anti-abortion statements and the physical shooting attack against a Planning Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs over the weekend.

“The only time the issue of abortion ever comes up — and you’ll notice this pattern – is when there’s a presidential election coming around. When there’s a presidential election, all of a sudden ‘Oh my god, we care so much about the babies,'” she said. “Babies this, babies that. You can’t kill any babies. It’s for political fucking gain. That’s all it’s about. That’s all they care about. It’s political gain — they don’t care about lives.”

Even as conservatives attack Planned Parenthood and accuse the organization of infanticide, she said, they rush to avoid any responsibility for possibly influencing the multiple attacks targeting the group since the release of the heavily-edited videos accusing it of profiting off the sale of fetal tissue.

“You can’t keep fucking saying ‘baby killer,’ because when you do that, crazy people will carry out acts of violence. That is violent rhetoric, and your violent rhetoric translates to violent actions,” Kasparian said. “If you don’t get that, you’re either in denial or you know it’s true and you just don’t want to admit it.”

While Republicans like Carly Fiorina — whose claim that the videos showed a “fully-formed fetus” was debunked — accused progressives of “hateful rhetoric” for criticizing her attacks on Planned Parenthood, co-host John Iadarola introduced a compilation of several extreme statements from conservatives like Newt Gingrich, Pat Robertson and Fiorina’s fellow presidential candidate, Ben Carson.

“Those statements came from the same individuals who are against providing health care to Americans,” Kasparian said. “It came from the same individuals who are against ‘food stamps,’ and governmental programs that help the poor to ensure that they stay alive, that they stay healthy. Those same statements came from people who deny our veterans — the same troops that they’re constantly talking about supporting — mental health care and things that would help them integrate back into society as healthy human beings.”

 

NFTOS
Blogger-In-Chief

Roger West

CARSON’S TAKE ON ABORTION

 On NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday, GOP presidential contender — and recent Iowa frontrunner — Ben Carson compared women who decided to have abortions to slaveowners who “thought that they had the right to do whatever they wanted to that slave.”

The discussion came after host Chuck Todd asked if life began at conception, to which Carson answered “I believe it does.” Todd asked whose right should be superseded — the mother or the child.

“In the ideal situation, the mother should not believe that the baby is her enemy, and should not be looking to terminate her baby,” Carson said. “Things are set up in such a way that the person in the world who has the greatest interest in protecting her baby is the mother.”

Carson said “purveyors of a vision” have been allowed to “make mothers believe that baby is her enemy and that they have a right to kill it. Can you see how perverted that line of thinking is?

Todd asked what happens if someone has an unwanted pregnancy — should they have a right to terminate it?

No. Think about this. During slavery — and I know that’s one of those words you’re not supposed to say, but I’m saying it. During slavery, a lot of the slaveowners thought that they had the right to do whatever they wanted to that slave. Anything that they chose to do. And, you know, what if the abolitionists had said “I don’t believe in slavery, I think it’s wrong, but you guys do whatever you want to do.” Where would we be?

In 2013, Carson compared the Affordable Care Act to slavery, saying it was the worst thing that happened to America since slavery, adding “it is slavery, in a way.”

Slavery was a brutal system that trapped millions and millions of people in bondage for over 200 years. Obamacare is a law that Congress passed which has helped 17.6 million people get health insurance through the private insurance market and existing government health care programs.

Earlier this year, Carson revived the conspiracy theory that Planned Parenthood concentrated their clinics in black neighborhoods as a “way to control the population.”

Todd then asked about an interview with Yahoo! News’ Jon Ward wherein Carson would not say whether he wanted to see Roe v. Wade overturned. “I favor life. That’s what I favor,” Carson had said in response to questions about the case. “It means that we will try to protect human life because all people in our country have a right to the protections of the law,” he said describing the Supreme Court justices he’d appoint — those who “believe in life” and “understand that a baby in the uterus is a human being and is protected by the Constitution.”

Carson went farther than that on overturning the case on Sunday. “I would like to see it done in the right way,” he said, again mentioning an examination of the judges he would appoint, “how have they behaved, who have they associated with, rather than what they say in an interview.”




On the court case, Carson said “ultimately I would love to see it overturned.” Asked whether that would contained exceptions, Carson said “I’m a reasonable person, and if people can come up with a reasonable explanation of why they would like to kill a baby, I’ll listen.” To Carson, an abortion in the case where the life or health of the mother is threatened was “extraordinarily rare situation” but that if that “rare” situation occurred “I believe there’s room to discuss that.” He said he “would not be in favor of killing a baby” that came about because of rape or incest.

He pointed to the “many stories” of people who have led “useful lives” after being born as a result of rape or incest.

Ben Carson has surged ahead of Donald Trump in recent Iowa polls, with Chris Wallace calling him the frontrunner there, citing an 84 percent favorability rating in a Quinnipiac poll on Fox News Sunday.

Iowa Republican voters find many of Carson’s extreme statements attractive, according to a recent Bloomberg/Des Moines Register poll. However, one area of his biography that repels them is the fact that he conducted research using tissue from aborted fetuses.

Chuck Todd asked Carson about his sometimes inflammatory rhetoric, such as about the Holocaust and guns and his accusation that Obama is a psychopath.

“As people get to know me, they know that I’m not a hateful, pathological person like some people try to make me out to be,” he said.

Chuck Todd asked why he so easily went to Nazi metaphors, like referring to the Gestapo when talking about health care. Carson said some rabbis had told him recently that he was “spot-on,” and blamed the media for being shallow and not thoughtful about his full meaning.

[cross-posted from thinkprogress]

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

HUCKABEE PROVES TO BE A THINKER OFF THE BEATEN PATH

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is defending Paraguay’s controversial decision to deny an abortion to a 10-year-old girl who became pregnant after being raped by her stepfather.

Appearing on CNN’s State of the Union on Sunday, the Republican presidential candidate said it was “horrible” that the girl, now 11, was raped. “But does it solve the problem by taking the life of an innocent child?” he asked.




The story of the young girl — given the pseudonym “Mainumby” in legal documents — has captured a good deal of attention, as she recently gave birth after Paraguayan officials prohibited her from getting an abortion. Abortion is illegal in Paraguay, except “in very rare cases when it’s deemed necessary to save a woman’s life.”

Whether Mainumby’s pregnancy posed a threat to her life has been hotly debated, as medical experts say that girls under the age of 15 are more at risk for complications during childbirth. For that reason, Mainumby’s child had to be delivered via Cesarean section.

Paraguay’s policy is similar to what Huckabee and some other Republican presidential candidates say they would support if elected. Huckabee, Sen. Marco Rubio, and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker have expressed a desire to ban abortion even in cases when women have been raped, or have been victims of incest.

The position has been unpopular in the past. Only 22 percent of Americans believe abortion should be illegal in cases of rape and incest, according to one Gallup poll.

CNN host Dana Bash appeared to question Huckabee’s position as well, pressing him on whether it would be easy “looking in the eyes of a 10-year-old girl and saying, ‘you had a horrible thing happen to you, and you’re going to have carry it out for the next nine months.”

“No, it isn’t easy,” Huckabee responded. “I wouldn’t pretend it’s anything other than a terrible tragedy. But let’s not compound the tragedy by taking yet another life.”

NFTOS

Blogger-In-Chief

Roger West

EXTREMEST HUCKABEE SUGGESTS DEPLOYING MILITARY TO STOP WOMEN FROM GETTING ABORTIONS

Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said at a campaign stop on Thursday that he would consider sending federal troops or the Federal Bureau of Investigation to stop abortions.

During a campaign stop in Iowa, reporters asked Huckabee about a recent controversy over an anti-choice organization‘s efforts to paint Planned Parenthood as a dubious entity that is selling “aborted baby parts” through the release of several heavily edited videos.

Huckabee said he would “invoke the 5th and 14th amendments for the protection of every human being.” The Fifth Amendment states, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger.” This suggests a Hucakbee presidency would unilaterally make all abortion illegally by deeming all fetuses are people.

He repeated a conservative line that there is now scientific proof that “unborn babies are human beings,” and the Supreme Court may not have known that when they ruled on Roe v. Wade in 1973. Many anti-choicers have pointed to a recent study that said a small percentage of 22-week fetusescan survive outside the womb and have used that as justification for earlier and earlier abortion bans.

“I will not pretend there is nothing we can do to stop this,” Huckabee said. When a reporter asked if hew would use federal troops or the FBI to this end, he said, “We’ll see if I get to be president.”

He cited Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln as his inspiration, saying they were previous presidents who have defied Supreme Court rulings.

YIKES! Mike, you are voted today's asshat of the day. Congrats wingnut, you've earned!




NFTOS
Blogger-In-Chief
Roger West

TEN YEAR OLD RAPE/INCEST VICTIM DENIED AN ABORTION

Human rights organizations are calling on Paraguayan officials to allow a 10-year-old rape victim to end her pregnancy, arguing that the country’s harsh abortion ban is comparable to torture.

Authorities say that the girl, whose name is being withheld, became pregnant after she was sexually assaulted by her stepfather. Her pregnancy was not discovered until she was about 20 weeks along and started complaining of a stomachache. Now, she isn’t being permitted to have an abortion.

Abortion is illegal in Paraguay except in very rare cases when it’s deemed necessary to save a woman’s life. Government officials — including the Paraguayan Ministry of Health — say there’s “no indication” that the child’s health is at risk, even though medical experts agree that very young adolescents under the age of 15 have higher risks of medical complications during childbirth compared to adult women.

Data collected by the World Health Organization confirms that girls in Latin America who give birth before they turn 16 years old are four times more likely to die during childbirth than young women in their twenties. In Paraguay specifically, 28 minors died last year due to complications stemming from giving birth.

Amnesty International has launched a petition pressuring the Paraguayan government to reverse course, arguing that the child’s age should make her eligible for the country’s narrow abortion exception. According to the group, the girl’s mother also asked for permission for her to have an abortion this week.

“The physical and psychological impact of forcing this young girl to continue with an unwanted pregnancy is tantamount to torture,” Guadalupe Marengo, the Americas Deputy Director at Amnesty International, said in a statement. “The Paraguayan authorities cannot sit idly by while this young rape survivor is forced to endure more agony and torment…Paraguay must step up to its responsibilities under international law.”

The United Nations has also likened cutting off abortion access to torture. Under international human rights law, reproductive rights are recognized as a critical aspect of reducing maternal mortality, and UN officials regularly call on countries with particularly harsh abortion bans to remove unnecessary restrictions on the procedure.

Nonetheless, Latin America is home to some of the world’s strictest abortion laws, and six countries there ban the procedure without any exceptions. In addition to driving up the rate of unsafe abortions, these harsh bans also ensure that some women are sent to prison after being accused of murdering their unborn children.

It’s not unusual for the region to spark international controversy with extreme cases. In recent years, an 11-year-old rape victim in Chile was denied an abortion and a 22-year-old woman in El Salvador almost died from lupus because the government wouldn’t let her have a life-saving abortion.

The current fight in Paraguay is putting a spotlight on the issues of incest and sexual assault plaguing very young girls, which significantly contributes to the rates of unintended pregnancy in this region of the world. According to government officials, about 680 Paraguayan girls between the ages of 10 and 14 years old gave birth last year, and many of those pregnancies were the result of sexual abuse perpetrated by their male relatives.

“Too often, society blames only the girl for getting pregnant,” Babatunde Osotimehin, the executive director of the UN Population Fund, wrote in a recent report about teen pregnancy in the developing world. “The reality is that adolescent pregnancy is most often not the result of a deliberate choice, but rather the absence of choices, and of circumstances beyond a girl’s control.”

[h/t thinkprogress]


NFTOS
STAFF WRITER

“I DARE YOU TO WALK IN MY SHOES”

This week, Ohio State Rep. Teresa Fedor stood up during a legislative debate about a proposed abortion ban and revealed publicly for the first time that she had been sexually assaulted, became pregnant, and had an abortion.

“You don’t respect my reason, my rape, my abortion, and I guarantee you there are other women who should stand up with me and be courageous enough to speak that voice,” Fedor told her fellow lawmakers, who are attempting to outlaw abortion procedures after just six weeks of pregnancy. “What you’re doing is so fundamentally inhuman, unconstitutional, and I’ve sat here too long.

“I dare any one of you to judge me,” she added. “I dare you to walk in my shoes.”

Fedor’s disclosure is just the latest personal admission from a female lawmaker who has determined she cannot remain silent about her own experience while her colleagues debate issues of reproductive rights on the floor.

Earlier this month, Arizona State Rep. Victoria Steele made a similar speech during a legislative debate over a measure that would make it harder for women to get insurance coverage for abortion services. Steele revealed that she had been the victim of sexual assault as a young girl, and later learned that the man who molested her had harmed multiple other victims.

The lawmaker had not planned to disclose her molestation, but she ended up feeling compelled to share her personal story after she was asked to explain why abortion should be considered a medical service. “This is health care. Having the ability to get an abortion,” she said to the committee. “And that’s why I see this as necessary.”

Meanwhile, during Michigan’s last session, State Senate Minority Leader Gretchen Whitmer spoke up in a debate over a measure to restrict insurance coverage for abortion — including for women who become pregnant from rape. Before the final vote, Whitmer tearfully disclosed her own history with sexual assault for the first time, telling her fellow lawmakers that she had been raped two decades ago.

“As I was considering what to say in opposition to the rape insurance proposal in front of the Senate today, I made the decision to speak about my own story publicly for the first time ever,” Whitmer said. “I felt it was important for my Republican colleagues to see the face of the women they’re hurting with their actions today.

Texas voters have also become well acquainted with former gubernatorial candidate Wendy Davis’ personal history, which she cited during her infamous filibuster against a package of harsh abortion restrictions in the summer of 2013. During that filibuster, she talked about her experience with terminating an ectopic pregnancy, recounted relying on Planned Parenthood clinics when she was uninsured, and explained that there was a point in her life when she wouldn’t have been able to afford to drive hundreds of miles to the nearest abortion clinic. Later, in her memoir, Davis detailed the reasons why she had a second abortion.

The list goes on. Nevada Assemblywomen Lucy Flores talked about her decision to have an abortion at the age of 16 during her testimony in favor of a comprehensive sex ed measure. U.S. Rep. Jackie Speier disclosed her own abortion on the House floor while arguing against a GOP-sponsored proposal to defund Planned Parenthood. Pennsylvania State Rep. Louise Williams Bishop discussed being raped at the age of 12 to explain her support for a bill to strengthen protections for victims of child abuse.

There are two sides to this emerging trend. On one hand, it speaks to the fact that increasing the number of women serving in government can end up influencing lawmaking. There wouldn't be nearly as many personal stories about issues that disproportionately affect women, like sexual assault and abortion, if legislatures consisted of solely men. Changing the conversation in this way is a reminder that creating more diversity in the halls of power can make a real difference.

On the other hand, even as reproductive advocates celebrate the fact that an increasing number of women are feeling comfortable enough to disclose their stigmatized health care experiences, there are lingering concerns. Is this too high of an emotional cost to demand from women in the public sphere? Do we feel too entitled to women’s personal stories, when we should be able to understand the impact of proposed abortion restrictions without that invasion of privacy?

“I personally resent that women have to tell their deepest, darkest traumas in public, their most private moments in public, in order to get people to understand that these bills, these attempts to take away women’s rights, how devastating they are,” Rep. Victoria Steele, the Arizona lawmaker who disclosed her sexual assault earlier this month, told this month. “We should not have to bare that part of our lives in such a public way to be able to access legal medical care.”

Still, although Steele said “it was hard as hell to do what I did in that hearing,” she concluded that she didn't regret it.

Cross Posted from thinkrpogress

NFTOS
STAFF WRITER

ABORTION BAN OVERTURNED

A federal judge permanently struck down North Dakota’s six-week abortion ban on Wednesday. The so-called “fetal heartbeat” measure, which used to represent the harshest ban in the nation, had already been temporarily blocked from taking effect while the legal challenge against it proceeded.

U.S. District Judge Daniel Hovland ruled that the law is “invalid and unconstitutional” and “cannot withstand a constitutional challenge,” pointing out that Roe v. Wade guarantees the right to abortion up until the point of viability.

Six week abortion bans seek to ban abortion after a fetal heartbeat can first be detected, even though that typically occurs so early that some women don’t even realize they’re pregnant yet. This type of restriction is so radical that many Republicans won’t sign onto it, signaling the beginning of a larger split within the anti-choice community. Although lawmakers in at least five different states considered fetal heartbeat bans this year, none have been able to advance.

Arkansas is the only other state that’s been able to pass a harsh abortion restriction based on the fetal heartbeat framing. After widespread outcry, that measure ended up being amended to a slightly less restrictive 12-week ban — but it hasn't fared any better in the courts. Last month, a federal judge struck it down.

The decision is a victory for women in North Dakota, who face huge barriers to abortion services. There’s only one abortion clinic left in the state, which has been struggling to remain open amid anti-choice attacks. Thanks to the hostile environment surrounding reproductive rights, many women in the state actually assume that conservative lawmakers have succeeded and abortion is already illegal.

Although abortion rights supporters have recently won several legal victories against harsh bans, it’s important to remember that other serious threats to women’s access to abortion often fly under the radar. States have successfully enacted a complex web of restrictions targeting clinics and providers that don’t grab as many headlines as more obviously harmful laws do. That’s why anti-choice groups tend to split over six-week abortion bans — the leaders of the movement know they’ll have more success with an incremental strategy to chip away at abortion rights when no one is looking.

“The court was correct to call this law exactly what it is: a blatant violation of the constitutional guarantees afforded to all women. But women should not be forced to go to court, year after year in state after state, to protect their constitutional rights,” Nancy Northup, the president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a statement. “We hope today’s decision, along with the long line of decisions striking down these attempts to choke off access to safe and legal abortion services in the U.S., sends a strong message to politicians across the country that our rights cannot be legislated away.”

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

SUPREME SCIENCE DENIERS

Arguments were all going well for the ACA until Justice Kennedy asked the magic question.

Today's Supreme Court arguments about contraception, the ACA and religious liberty began with the ACA in a winning position.

ThinkProgress:

It was clear from the get go that the Court’s liberals understood that their best course involved highlighting the dangerous consequences of a victory for Hobby Lobby. Paul Clement, the de facto Solicitor General of the Republican Party who argued the case on Hobby Lobby’s behalf, barely uttered his first sentence before Justice Sonia Sotomayor cut him off to ask what other medical procedures religious employers could refuse to cover in their employee health plans. Justice Elena Kagan quickly joined the party. If Hobby Lobby can deny birth control coverage, Kagan asked, what about employers who object to vaccinations? Or blood transfusions?

When Clement tried to deflect this list, Kagan came armed with an even bigger what. What of religious employers who object to gender equality, or the minimum wage, or family medical leave, or child labor laws? If the Supreme Court agrees with Hobby Lobby’s brief, which argues that laws burdening a corporation’s purported religious faith must survive the “most demanding test known to constitutional law,” then there would be few laws corporations could not exempt themselves from following.

So far, so good. And then Justice Kennedy dropped the bomb:

Kennedy did something different, he did not weigh in on the question of whether non-abortions can count as abortion — indeed, he seemed to understand the difference between birth control and abortion. Nevertheless, he looked at the government’s requirement to provide birth control coverage and envisioned a future law compelling Hobby Lobby to pay for actual abortions — just as he once gazed upon a requirement to buy health insurance and imagined the government forcing everyone to buy broccoli. In Justice Kennedy’s Courtroom, the government doesn’t have to defend the law it actually passed, it has to defend the worst law Kennedy can imagine them passing — even if that law would never make it through Congress.

Clement pounced on the opening Kennedy gave him the second he took the podium for his rebuttal argument. The government’s position, he claimed, goes straight to abortion and “that cannot be what Congress meant when it passed RFRA.” Kagan’s face grew even more worried.

In order to get through that line of logic, Kennedy would have to deny science and assume that IUDs, as one example, cause abortions. Despite reams of scientific literature to the contrary, it appears that he may be poised to go in that direction. And that will mean that any concerns he might have about employers denying other medical treatments in the name of religious liberty will also fly out of the window, because abortion trumps all else.

What's next? Will taxes be the next "religious liberty" argument? These forced birth advocates worship at the Altar of the Almighty Fetus first, then baptize themselves in fountains of coins. It's enough to make baby Jesus weep.

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West

ABORTION DOWN AS WOMEN USE BIRTH CONTROL

Between 2008 and 2011, the national abortion rate declined by 13 percent, according to a new report from the Guttmacher Institute that will be published in a forthcoming issue of the Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health journal. That puts 2011′s abortion rate at 16.9 abortions per every 1,000 women of reproductive age, the lowest rate recorded since Roe v. Wade legalized the procedure in 1973.

The anti-choice community celebrated the news, claiming that an increasing number of women are choosing to carry their pregnancies to term. “This is a post-sonogram generation,” Charmaine Yoest, the president of the conservative Americans United for Life group that helps push state-level abortion restrictions, told the Washington Post. “There is increased awareness throughout our culture of the moral weight of the unborn baby. And that’s a good thing.”

“It shows that women are rejecting the idea of abortion as the answer to an unexpected pregnancy,” Carol Tobias, the president of the National Right to Life Committee, agreed.

In fact, that perspective doesn't actually align with the research in this area. Previous studies have found that sonograms don’t actually change women’s minds about having an abortion. And the Guttmacher’s new report concludes that the abortion rate isn't declining because fewer women are choosing abortion in favor of giving birth to a child; rather, it’s because fewer women are getting pregnant in the first place.

“The decline in abortions coincided with a steep national drop in overall pregnancy and birth rates,” Rachel Jones, the lead author of Guttmacher’s study, explained in a statement accompanying the new report. “Contraceptive use improved during this period, as more women and couples were using highly effective, long-acting reversible contraceptive methods, such as the IUD. Moreover, the recent recession led many women and couples to want to avoid or delay pregnancy and childbearing.”

It’s also important to note that a drop in abortions shouldn't necessarily be considered a positive thing, depending on the circumstances. As states have imposed an increasing number of harsh state-level restrictions on the procedure, many women — especially economically disadvantaged individuals and communities of color — have struggled to exercise their right to choose. Many of those women end up giving birth not because they didn’t want an abortion, but because they simply could not access one. For instance, harsh anti-abortion laws in Texas are projected to result in 22,000 women losing access to safe and legal abortion this year alone.

The Guttmacher Institute, which tracks state-level attacks on abortion, is well aware of this reality. Since the bulk of the wave of new abortion restrictions were enacted after 2011, the group’s most recent report didn't find a clear connection between harsh state laws and declining abortion rates. But, according to the researchers, “this does not mean these laws are not problematic.”

“Increased regulation of abortion contributes to the stigmatization of abortion and of the women who obtain one, and can create a climate of fear and hostility even in states where such regulations are not imposed,” the study’s authors conclude. “Because state legislatures continued to debate and enact more restrictive abortion measures throughout 2011, 2012 and 2013, future research will need to examine whether and to what extent these laws affect abortion incidence and access to services.”

Other aspects of reproductive health care have shifted since 2011, too. Obamacare’s contraceptive coverage officially took effect, which has helped expand U.S. women’s access to affordable birth control. But Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards was quick to note that this birth control provision has also been under attack, something that could jeopardize the current downward trend in unintended pregnancy rates.

“This report comes just as some politicians and corporations are trying to make it harder for women to get birth control by chipping away at the historic benefit in the Affordable Care Act that requires insurance plans to cover birth control without a co-pay,” Richards said in a statement, referring to several legal challenges against Obamacare that are currently up before the Supreme Court.

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

PRO CHOICE HELP?

Cross posted from thinkprogress:

Last week, Senate Republicans introduced a national abortion ban that would chisel away at the constitutional rights guaranteed under Roe v. Wade. Now, their Democratic colleagues are striking back with some abortion-related legislation of their own. On Wednesday, a group of pro-choice senators plan to introduce the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2013, a measure intended to stem the barrage of state-level restrictions on reproductive rights.

Despite the fact that Roe is still technically the law of the land, state legislatures have still managed to attack abortion access from all angles. Ever since the 1992 Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision gave states the power to regulate abortion to protect the “health of the mother,” anti-choice lawmakers have rushed to enact several different types of restrictions that supposedly achieve this end. Those state laws — which include forced ultrasound requirements, mandatory waiting periods, restrictions on the administration of the abortion pill, and burdensome clinic regulations — have continued to mount. According to the Guttmacher Institute, this strategy peaked in 2011, when lawmakers enacted a record-breaking 92 new abortion restrictions at the state level.

Now, led by Sen. Richard Blumenthal , a group of Democratic lawmakers wants to change that. According to Roll Call, which obtained a copy of the legislation, the new bill would preempt state’s efforts to indirectly restrict abortion by requiring new laws to be medically necessary. The measure emphasizes that new abortion regulations shouldn't decrease access to abortion services or require doctors to go against their best judgment.

While the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2013 wouldn't immediately supersede the existing state restrictions, it would set the stage for court challenges to officially overturn them.

“This assault on essential, constitutionally protected rights has gone on too long,” Blumenthal writes in an op-ed published on the Huffington Post. “We are introducing the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2013 this week to end it, once and for all. Our bill would stop states from subjecting reproductive health care providers to burdensome requirements that are not applied to medical professionals providing similar services.”

It’s rare for women’s health supporters to go on the offensive. With the notable exception of California, which recently enacted several pieces of legislation to expand access to abortion, women’s health supporters are typically preoccupied with defending themselves against a steady stream of anti-choice attacks. Even in progressive states like New York, it’s proven difficult for pro-choice lawmakers to enact any proactive measures to move the ball forward on reproductive rights. Indeed, the Women’s Health Protection Act of 2013 represents the first piece of national legislation in nearly a decade that is specifically intended to protect — rather than undermine — abortion rights.

Planned Parenthood is applauding the initiative. “As the nation’s leading women’s health care provider and advocate, we see firsthand the terrible impact that these restrictions have on women — cutting thousands of women off from access to safe and legal abortion, and from basic preventive health care,” the group’s president, Cecile Richards, said in a statement. “This bill would ensure that a woman’s constitutional rights don’t depend on her zip code.”

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

DOES IT MATTER WHO'S DRIVING THE CAR?

ALL MEN PANEL DECIDING WOMEN'S RIGHT'S

A federal judge has sided with reproductive rights advocates to declare one of Texas’ new abortion restrictions unconstitutional, ensuring that one of the provisions in a sweeping new anti-choice law will not take effect this week.

U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel heard the case last week and had promised to issue a ruling before the bill, HB 2, was scheduled to take go into place on Tuesday. Texas’ GOP-led legislature enacted HB 2 over the summer, after the dramatic debate over the proposed restrictions was elevated to the national stage. All eyes were on Texas after state Sen. Wendy Davis  filibustered the bill for 11 hours straight during a special legislative session in June. Less than 24 hours after Davis successfully blocked the bill, however, Gov. Rick Perry called yet another special session to force the legislation through.

In September, more than a dozen women’s health providers sued the state to block several of HB 2′s provisions from taking effect. Their challenge specifically concerned the provisions requiring abortion clinics to obtain admitting privileges at local hospitals — a medically unnecessary requirement that ultimately forces clinics to close when they’re unable to comply — and requiring doctors to use an outdated protocol to administer the abortion pill. They pointed out that the combination of those two restrictions would have “catastrophic” effects on abortion access in the state.

In his opinion, Yeakel noted that the “admitting-privileges provision is without a rational basis and places a substantial obstacle in the path of a woman seeking an abortion of a nonviable fetus.” Similar logic has led several federal judges to block identical provisions in other states. Yeakel did not completely strike down the provision related to medication-induced abortions, determining that women whose lives are at risk should be able to follow the off-label procedure for taking the abortion pill.

Federal District Court Judge - Texas Abortion Law is Unconstitutional

The ruling also does not affect several of the other provisions in Texas’ omnibus law, such as the requirement that abortion clinics need to meet the same standards as ambulatory surgical centers — which won’t take effect until 2014 — or the ban that outlaws abortion procedures after 20 weeks of pregnancy.

Women’s health advocates have estimated that taken together, the harsh new regulations could force the vast majority of the state’s clinics to close, leaving more than 22,000 Texas women without any safe options for terminating a pregnancy. They warn that the law will force more low-income women to cross the border into Mexico to obtain illegal and unsafe abortion-inducing drugs. Striking the admitting privileges provision will help somewhat improve this situation, but abortion rights activists have already vowed to keep fighting the rest of HB 2.

I am a firm believer in striking down all the anti-abortion rhetoric and laws, if it's not your abortion, it's none of your business, and it should never ever be regulated by a group of old pasty white men. In the retro world of the archaic GOP, women still take a back seat when it comes to controlling their own bodies. Without any safety precautions its a dangerous ride indeed. Does it matter who's at the wheel driving the car? You can bet your sweet ass is does.

Life decisions, if there not your own - mind your own fracking business - for the bible thumping Christian; Judge not lest ye be judged - and let him, who is without sin cast the first stone [Matt. 7:1 Do not judge, or you too will be judged."] If it is truly wrong to abort - then let the all powerful OZ will take care of it!

IOWA SLIPS A MICKEY ON ITS RESIDENTS

Right as the Labor Day weekend began, Iowa officials took steps to severely limit reproductive health access for women in the state. Although that move went largely unnoticed before the three-day weekend, it could end up having a huge impact on the future of abortion care for people across the country.

On Friday, Iowa’s Board of Medicine voted to eliminate the largest telemedicine abortion program in the country. That means doctors in the state won’t be allowed to use video technology to prescribe abortion-inducing drugs to rural and low-income women who don’t have the means to travel to the nearest clinic — even though they've been safely doing so for the past five years.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has been operating its telemedicine abortion program since 2008, and there’s no reason it should have come under any kind of particular scrutiny this summer. Studies have repeatedly found that it’s a safe method of delivering reproductive care, and patients are just as satisfied after speaking with a doctor over a video conference as they are after making an in-person trip to a clinic. Nonetheless, the Board of Medicine has been considering banning the practice for the past several months — and the Friday vote makes it official.

“This decision is a political attack aimed at restricting access to abortion in Iowa. Proponents of this rule aren't against telemedicine technology; they are against safe, legal abortion and are unjustly targeting our system with no scientific information or evidence to back their claims,” Planned Parenthood of the Heartland’s president, Jill June, said in a statement.

Indeed, telemedicine technology is becoming increasingly common. An estimated 10 to 12 million Americans use it each year to remotely receive care from a medical professional, and the U.S. government now relies on the practice to treat chronically ill veterans. Of course, opponents of telemedicine abortion typically aren't opposed to the practice in general — they just don’t want it to be used for abortion. It’s yet another way that the anti-choice community is attempting to segregate abortion care from the rest of reproductive health services.

Planned Parenthood of the Heartland has been somewhat of a pioneer when it comes to telemedicine abortion care. A few other Planned Parenthood affiliates have begun to offer the services, but Iowa has been home to the largest program. It’s been difficult to expand into other states largely because anti-choice lawmakers have worked to cut off the possibility. Over the past several years, states have rushed to enact bans on telemedicine abortions even if those services weren't actually offered yet — effectively curtailing the potential medical advances in abortion care before they've even had a chance to get off the ground.

That’s a serious problem because telemedicine programs may represent the next battleground for abortion rights. Iowa has touted its program as an effective way of restoring health care access for poor and rural women who don’t live in counties with Planned Parenthood clinics, and wouldn't be able to make the trip to the nearest one. That’s becoming an unfortunate reality for low-income women in states across the country. Thanks to a mounting pile of state-level restrictions on abortion, clinics are being forced to close their doors and patients are being forced to travel hundreds of miles to get the care they need. For many poorer women, that represents too big of an expense — and women’s ability to access an abortion is becoming directly proportional to her economic privilege. Telemedicine abortion services could help address some of those regional and economic disparities. But now that Iowa has moved to ban it, there may be little hope for the fledgling programs in other states.

In a public hearing last week, health care professionals condemned Iowa’s medical board for rushing to throw out a program that has been largely successful. Since 2008, Iowa’s telemedicine program has helped an estimated 3,000 rural women end a pregnancy within the first trimester. OB-GYNs suggested that the Board of Medicine — which has been stacked with anti-abortion members over the past two years — was simply pursuing a political agenda. Now that the Board has officially voted, critics say their worst fears have been confirmed.

“It’s extremely alarming that the Board of Medicine, which is duty bound to make evidence- based medical decisions, rushed to judgment without reviewing evidence gathered by their own staff,” June’s statement points out. “This undermines the concept and integrity of the Board of Medicine and health care in Iowa as we know it.”

This new Republican outreach program, that of choke and puke politics - hating and punishing everything non-white male, continues to be a huge success.[sarcastic]

NFTOS

STAFF WRITER

KOCH WHORE SIGNS RADICAL ABORTION RESTRICTIONS

SCOTT "KOCH WHORE" WALKER

Is this the small government that the Talibangelicals are always prattling on about?

Wisconsin Gov. Scott "Koch Whore" Walker (Talibangelical) quietly signed new abortion restrictions into law on the Friday after the Fourth of July that will require “women seeking abortions to undergo an ultrasound and ban doctors who lack admitting privileges at nearby hospitals from performing the procedures.” The law could force two state abortion clinics to close their doors and is already sparking legal challenges from reproductive health advocates:

The law takes effect Monday. Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin and the American Civil Liberties Union filed a federal lawsuit within hours of the signing alleging the bill is unconstitutional and asking for a temporary restraining order blocking the measure.

 “What the Legislature has done is to set up a system where the ability to provide abortions is contingent on the decision of a private institution and that’s unconstitutional,” Planned Parenthood’s attorney, Lester Pines, said in an interview.

A spokeswoman for the state Department of Justice, which defends state laws, said agency attorneys would review the lawsuit and respond in court.

Leading medical groups also opposed the measures. The Wisconsin Medical Society, the Wisconsin Association of Local Health Departments and Boards, the Wisconsin Academy of Family Physicians, the Wisconsin Hospital Association, and the Wisconsin Public Health Association all declined to endorse the proposals when Republicans fast-tracked the bills through the legislature in June.

The restrictions are part of a wave of legislative activity in the states that aims to severely limit women’s access to reproductive health services. According to data from the Guttmacher Institute, governors have approved more than 40 such proposals in 2013.

The Associated Press notes that Walker, who may be considering a presidential bid in 2016, “didn't sign the bill in public, instead sending out a statement early Friday afternoon saying the bill was now law.” The governor followed a similar strategy in 2012, when he enacted controversial bills to significantly limit access to abortion services and sex education on the eve of a holiday weekend and announced the laws in a press statement two days later.

Scott Walker is "the goggle-eyed homunculus hired by Koch Industries to manage their Midwest subsidiary formerly known as the state of Wisconsin." Charles Pierce.

This speaks volumes of the cheese head governor, to sign a bill behind closed doors. There is no doubt in my mind that this Koch whore is a coward. Any man who willingly tucks his testicles under his posterior cheeks for the pleasure of pleasing the Koch Whores themselves [koch brothers] - he certainly is no man!

NFTOS

Editor-In-Chief

Roger West