Barack Obama has hurt women worse than Todd Akin's words ever could

reply to post by usernameconspiracy


Whose being forced to do anything?

You sound silly. Todd Akin's words are meaningless. Akin can change or do anything. It's Obama that can directly effect and change womens lives and he has. He has carried out an economic assault on women when it comes to the economy.

Of course Obama supporters want to talk about everything else they can but Obama's horrible record on the economy.

reply to post by neoholographic


Not getting free that easy!

The title of this thread is ( emphases mine ) "Barack Obama has hurt women worse than Todd Akin's ever could"

You might want to Google Akins and figure out how you're going to substantiate this!

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


Easy.

Todd Akin has no power. He made a silly statement.

Barack Obama has power and has used that power to put in place policies that are not only destructive to women but to everyone else. This is why the Obama zombies don't want to talk about Obama's record. They want to talk about Todd Akin from MO.

Sorry, it's not going to work. People care more about getting a job and taking care of their family than they care about Akin, Shamus the dog or anything else the Democrats want to use to avoid talking about Obama's record.

The Destruction carried out by the Obama economic policies is more devastating than the words of Todd Akin.

Originally posted by sirhumperdink
this is silly
unemployment for almost every demographic has gone up since he became president
he inherited a recession and problems that have been compounding for decades
its ridiculous how people fail to realize none of this can or does happen overnight and that these are the results of past decisions as much or more so than current decisions
im not going to place blame and im not going to give my opinion of presidents past or current but regardless of what i think of obama to say he is responsible for the recession is ignorant or disingenuous

edit on 20-8-2012 by sirhumperdink because: (no reason given)

Inherited a recession, but then increases spending 20 fold will help?

"Problems that have been compounding for decades".. You mean both parties spending money like it grows on trees? Then obama increasing that by a googleplex is supposed to reverse this?

You are right when you say Obama is not responsible.. He definitely has no sense of responsibility whatsoever..

Obama and Michelle spend most of their time planning vacations and shopping for fancy clothes, and hobnobbing with rich and famous people, while their poverty stricken voting base counts their foodstamps!

Another example of his lack of responsibility to America is how he completely ignores the constitution and simply does whatever he wishes.. And we are seeing a whole lot of other officials and government agencies follow his lead in this same attitude and do whatever they wish also..

His laundry list of things he has done resembles what you might expect Chairman Mao's bucket list to look like, if he were still alive..

Even I can have some sympathy for Obama when I look at all the real problems that he inherited when he was elected, but taking a serious look at every decision and action he has made since being elected, makes having any sympathy for him, a fools errand.

He simply cannot be trusted to have the best interests of the country in mind.. He constantly lies to the people of America..
He promises progress and positive change, but delivers deception, destruction and bad news on a daily basis..

What more do you need in order to understand what an incredible and expensive MISTAKE this guy is?

The sad part is it doesn't really matter...his contender is a Democrat by name only...she's a Blue Dog Democrat (aka a Republican in disguise).

The only way you can justify voting for the GOP is if:

- you are white.
- you are a fundamentalist Christian.
- you are male.
- you are wealthy or rich.

In every other case you are better off voting Democrat.

Having said up, by now both parties are corporate puppets...it's just that the Democrats are at least trying to hide it, while the GOP is parading their sock-puppetry...like Romney telling us "corporations are people my friend".

Hell, the GOP is disenfranchising tons of US CITIZENS!

As for the GOP's view on women:

1) They aren't for equal pay. So you'd be a fool to vote for them as a working woman.
2) They want to legislate who you can sleep with...talking about "small government" and all
3) They want to legislate what you can do with your body.

And then there's this:





So in case you're wondering what they care about...it's not women...it's ONLY their corporate donors

reply to post by neoholographic


Dont let FACTS, get in the way of popular pitchfork wielding Opinion.

reply to post by neoholographic


If you really cared about women's issues, other than to selfishly use them to do your republican campaigning against Obama, you would acknowledge that what Akin said was destructive.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by neoholographic

 

If you really cared about women's issues, other than to selfishly use them to do your republican campaigning against Obama, you would acknowledge that what Akin said was destructive.

It's not just about what Akin said...it's their entire platform. I mean, how do they justify being against EQUAL PAY to the average working woman? Are they expecting those women to say "they are against me making the same money for the same jobs...but nevermind, I'll vote for them anyway"

Way over 95% of women are on birth control too...therefore supporting it. However, the GOP is against that too.

You'd have to be a moron to vote for them as a woman.

By the way, the thing that really amazes me is the reactions the GOP shows to what he said. The strongest reaction consists of "we disagree with Akin"...but their main focus seems to be on the Senate seat and how Romney might get impacted by all of this. So instead of being really outraged and showing support for women, all they care about is keeping their influence (and corporate donations).

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by neoholographic

 

If you really cared about women's issues, other than to selfishly use them to do your republican campaigning against Obama, you would acknowledge that what Akin said was destructive.

Actually, AKIN IS AN IDIOT !!!!!!!

MORON !

SHOULD RESIGN !

There...........




Now can we talk about Obama's "Kill Lists", 20000 Drones in the skies, NDAA, Polarization of America, Why are we STILL at War, Unemployment, Poor People,etc.......


You know, the real things, these Candidates, DON'T want to talk about.

Now please release numbers of those same demographics under the Bush Presidency so we can compare.

reply to post by sonnny1

Now can we talk about Obama's "Kill Lists", 20000 Drones in the skies, NDAA, Polarization of America, Why are we STILL at War, Unemployment, Poor People,etc.......

1) Kill lists => I totally agree.
2) Drones & signature strikes => I totally agree.
3) NDAA => I totally agree.

Now the sad part is, if you believe any of the GOP candidates would have acted differently...well...you're wrong. Remember who pushed through that damn "Patriot Act"? Remember who was against net neutrality? Remember who started Gitmo? Remember who invaded 2 countries on false pretences? Remember who renamed "torture" to "advanced interrogation techniques"?

4) Polarization of America => Can't blame Obama for that, not after the GOP's first meeting after he won resulted in them stating they will oppose him on EVERYTHING no matter what.
5) Wars => I agree partially that it sucks we aren't out of that crap yet...but given the war mongering the GOP showed during the primaries, I think it's safe to say the GOP would be even worse. Hell, according to them we should invade Iran YESTERDAY.
6) Poor people => Are now better off than under Bush...and none of the proposed plans by Obama would hurt them as much as that dreadful Romney/Ryan plan. According to them, EVERYONE earning sub-200k would end up paying more.

In short, while you can blame Obama for a lot of things, claiming the GOP would have done it better is silly...hell, in many cases like wars they would be demonstrably worse.

Originally posted by MrXYZ


In short, while you can blame Obama for a lot of things, claiming the GOP would have done it better is silly...hell, in many cases like wars they would be demonstrably worse.

All I blame Obama for, is the same thing people blamed Bush for.

Perpetrating in the destruction of our Liberties, in the guise of protection.


The problem with the Left is, they cant see it. They are too busy, guzzling down more DENIAL filled Kool-aid!

Its got to suck, knowing Obama is exactly like Bush, once you stop, to take a look..........

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by MrXYZ


In short, while you can blame Obama for a lot of things, claiming the GOP would have done it better is silly...hell, in many cases like wars they would be demonstrably worse.

All I blame Obama for, is the same thing people blamed Bush for.

Perpetrating in the destruction of our Liberties, in the guise of protection.


The problem with the Left is, they cant see it. They are too busy, guzzling down more DENIAL filled Kool-aid!

Its got to suck, knowing Obama is exactly like Bush, once you stop, to take a look..........

Re-read the my post, I just admitted that some of the stuff he did is clearly bad. The point is, given what the GOP candidates said during the primaries, they would be a lot worse. In the case of women rights, they ARE worse, and that's a FACT.

reply to post by sonnny1

Its got to suck, knowing Obama is exactly like Bush, once you stop, to take a look..........

And voting in Romney would make that better....???

Voting in ANY Republican would make that UNsuck?

I'll take a Bush-like Obama over an Aiken-like Romney any day of the week.

reply to post by ErEhWoN

I'll take a Bush-like Obama over an Aiken-like Romney any day of the week.

And this is sadly what the entire elections comes down to

Hell, as I said, a lot of the things the GOP blames Obama for they would be WORSE at...like wars...or women's rights...or the poor...or minorities...

Look at it this way: We have 2 corporate sock puppets...one dresses up like an angel (and isn't one), and one dresses up as the devil (and is one). Apples or oranges, it doesn't really matter. The thing is, unless you're a wealthy white fundamentalist male Christian you should definitely pick the apple (even if you don't like the taste of apples) because you are allergic against oranges

reply to post by alienreality


Contrary to conservative rhetoric, President Obama has been the thriftiest president since the 1950s.Government spending has actually slowed.

Under Bush, spending inreased by 17.5%
Under Obama, spending increased by 1.8%.

and is scheduled to fall to 1.3% in 2013.

reply to post by sonnny1


Usual rhetoric these days on ATS with nothing to back it up.

reply to post by MrXYZ


Let us not forget the only mandatory healthcare that the GOP likes, which is state sanctioned rape of women, the forced vaginal ultrasound before getting an abortion.

Setting partisan politics aside for one moment, there's one thing we should all agree on:

MONEY NEEDS TO GET REMOVED FROM POLITICS!!

Elections should be based on OPINIONS and NOT who has the most money!!

Until this gets fixed, it doesn't really matter who wins.

Also, it would kind of help if the media would hold candidates (including the current president) accountable based on FACTS!

So if Obama claims Romney killed someone's mother, he should be called out on it. If he quotes some wrong figure in relation to something Romney did, he should be shamed.

On the flip side, if Romney tells people Obama just stole $700m of people's Medicare when all he did was SAVE that money while not cutting services...ergo increasing efficiency...well, the media should shame him too for that.

Sadly the media are now fully owned subsidiaries of corporate America too, so don't expect anything but propaganda from then (left or right, doesn't matter).

When Fox tried to enter the Canadian market for example the Canadian Broadcasting Association told them "fine...but if you lie during news segments you'll pay a fine". Guess what, they immediately pulled back and forgot about their Canadian expansion plans. In essence, they ADMIT that they WANT to lie to their audience.

Fox isn't alone...they all do it. Hell, MSNBC shut down one of their anchors because he was outspoken against the GOP (which they loved) AND Obama (which they hated).

The biggest joke is CNN though. On the right you have Fox, on the left you have MSNBC, and in the middle is CNN saying "hell, they might both be right, we don't know...comon' people, send us your opinions on Twitter"

US "News" media aren't doing their job, and no one's holding them accountable.

reply to post by neoholographic


Todd Akins has no power? I warned ya! Google!!!

William Todd Akin (born July 5, 1947) is the U.S. Representative for Missouri's 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. He is a member of the Republican Party.

Been in Congress for 11 years.

He was a member of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Not too shabby!

Committee assignments
Committee on Armed Services
Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces
Subcommittee on Seapower and Expeditionary Forces (Chairman)
Committee on the Budget
Committee on Science, Space and Technology
Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics
Subcommittee on Energy and Environment

Caucus memberships

Republican Study Committee
Tea Party Caucus

Read those committee assignments. Gotta admit it. He's a pretty powerful guy.

And here are a couple of different voting records for Congressman Akin. They each have their own cool little instant summary kinda tools - so I threw them both in.

Now I'll make this on topic...

Again, from wiki...

Akin is an outspoken opponent of abortion in all cases, including health reasons or in cases of rape or incest. He opposes embryonic stem cell research, is a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, and is generally opposed to increases in taxation and spending. As a U.S. Representative, he has continued to support these views, earning a 96% rating from the American Conservative Union in 2008, and 100% in 2007. Akin has an A rating from the National Rifle Association.

This is where his damage to women can begin to be calculated. How many health bills or social programs did he help block that might have saved a woman here and there?

How many women might be alive today if the US would have followed the wise path and engaged widely in stem cell research? How many womens lives could this have saved?

How many guns did he help get into the hands of people who shot women?

We can fight about the actual numbers later on. For now I'll let you research and I'll just say that the bar for proving your OP thread title might be out of reach.

~Heff