Scott Brown: I oppose defunding Planned Parenthood
posted at 7:52 pm on March 22, 2011 by Allahpundit
We all understand that primarying him would be a kamikaze mission since at this point he may well be the only Republican in Massachusetts capable of getting elected to the Senate. That knowledge has bought him a wide, wide berth among the base. But I keep thinking — at some point, he’s going to cross a line and they’re going to go full RINO-stomp on him. Not even because they want to. Because they have to.
US Senator Scott Brown opposes a House Republican plan to cut all federal funding for Planned Parenthood, the womens’ health service provider, and today urged budget negotiators to reach a compromise.
“I support family planning and health services for women,” Brown, a Bay State Republican, said in a statement. “Given our severe budget problems, I don’t believe any area of the budget is completely immune from cuts. However, the proposal to eliminate all funding for family planning goes too far. As we continue with our budget negotiations, I hope we can find a compromise that is reasonable and appropriate.”…
Earlier this month, Brown voted in favor the House GOP proposal that would have made the cuts, though he said at the time that he “would have had different priorities” in cutting spending.
There’s a lot of deliberate ambiguity here, obviously. He’s open to cutting PP’s budget … just not the whole thing. And he’s open to voting for the House GOP’s budget resolutions even when they completely defund PPP … although he’s not happy about it. In fact, the ambiguity goes back to the aftermath of last year’s special election, when he told Barbara Walters that yes, he’s pro-choice, but “I’m against federal funding of abortions.” If federal money went towards PP’s abortion practice, he’d have to vote no, but since it’s earmarked for contraception and unrelated services (which of course frees up other money at PP to apply towards abortions), well, that’s A-OK. Behold the dilemma of a Massachusetts Republican, forever inching his way along a political tightrope.
He’s the third Senate Republican, along with Collins and Murkowski, to come out against defunding PP. Which leaves Boehner … where? If he attaches the PP rider to the next House budget bill and any of these three end up voting against it for that reason, the Democrats will crow about “bipartisan opposition” to the “renegade” House Republicans or whatever. Boehner’s going to have to yank it, right? Or at least split it off into a separate bill and let the Senate shoot it down, which will preserve the viability of the overarching budget bill while giving the base a new reason to be angry at Harry Reid.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
He’s officially an asshole.
Ward Cleaver on March 22, 2011 at 8:43 PM
I’m as enthusiastic as anyone about defunding PP, but do any of us with triple digit IQ think defunding PP would ever pass in the Senate with the Dems in the majority? No matter how much moolah you sent to help him get elected; you gotta be realistic, folks.
Brown and his quirky votes is about the best you’re gonna get when you’ve got a Republican from Mass. He has to throw his more moderate voters a bone now and then.
Chill. It could be worse. It could have been a Kennedy.
marybel on March 22, 2011 at 8:43 PM
Quick, call the priest..Sen. Brown is now possessed and in need of Exorcism. or simply a new brain that is not filled with liberalism.
hawkman on March 22, 2011 at 8:40 PM
hawkman:I did a googly,and there is a,
Political Exorcism
Monday, Dec. 28,1992
**********************
ULTIMATELY, IT MAY COME DOWN TO A MATTER OF passion vs. Passion. Twenty Republican centrist leaders who think they can muster enough of the former to check the growing power of the latter have announced the creation of the Republican Majority Coalition. The group’s main goal is to excise controversial moral questions, like abortion, gay rights and school prayer from politics generally and from the next G.O.P. platform in particular.
Though it boasts prominent names, including Senators Arlen Specter, Nancy Kassebaum, John Chafee and Warren Rudman, the new assemblage faces rough going. Other moderates, reluctant to anger religious activists, declined to join the effort. Even the pugnacious Specter cautioned afterward that “it is important that we not pick fights or disagree with anyone.” Ralph Reed, who runs Pat Robertson’s Christian Coalition, noted that a previous effort to mobilize centrists had flopped. “It’s awfully hard to motivate moderates,” Reed observed.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,977365,00.html#ixzz1HNYeiiqV
canopfor on March 22, 2011 at 8:43 PM
Why doesn’t he just change his name to Kennedy and be done with it? Jerk.
Ward Cleaver on March 22, 2011 at 8:44 PM
Are you and canopfor going to tag team again?
Cindy Munford on March 22, 2011 at 8:46 PM
Would you rather have Martha Coakley? You people dont get it. This is Massachusetts, fiscally moderate to conservative and socially liberal. He is not a RINO he is a realist.
I am happy to have his vote sometimes than never.
Ricki on March 22, 2011 at 8:48 PM
Mistake, Scott. It will come home to haunt you.
petefrt on March 22, 2011 at 8:48 PM
Precisely. Even those who are pro-choice should be able to see PP for the eugenics cult it changed its name from.
MadisonConservative on March 22, 2011 at 8:51 PM
Bishop on March 22, 2011 at 8:38 PM
============
Are you and canopfor going to tag team again?
Cindy Munford on March 22, 2011 at 8:46 PM
Cindy Munford:Lol,you is bad!:)
canopfor on March 22, 2011 at 8:51 PM
Welcome to the real world folks!
The solution to PP is NOT to defund it, but turn it into an accredited NGO (non-governmental organization) that taxpayers can choose to fund with either tax credit or deductible donations. One could argue that as an NGO, PP might actually end up with more funding — it becomes a taxpayer decision, NOT THE DECISION OF THIS OR THAT CONGRESSCRITTER who may or may not believe in PP.
Don’t just evolve PP into an NGO — provide a clear and simple path to turn all sorts of federal programs into accredited NGOs. Then let the taxpayers NOT POLITICIANS OR POLITICS decide their future. They might fail, merge or prosper.
It’s time for the GOP Losership (and many conservatives) to start to think out of the box for solutions to our morally and fiscally bankrupt federal government. It’s never going to be easy for politicians to ‘defund’ something.
drfredc on March 22, 2011 at 8:56 PM
Bay State Baby Killing Progressive with a Conservative pickup joins the “GUTLESS GOP GROUP”.
Shock!
PappyD61 on March 22, 2011 at 8:57 PM
Good for him. There are more important issues than increasing the number of unwanted pregnancies and cutting off important services for women and couples.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:00 PM
That’s nice you squish. Why don’t you just kill the babies yourself and make it official.
jawkneemusic on March 22, 2011 at 9:00 PM
Fine, then just cut the part that murders children.
Greek Fire on March 22, 2011 at 9:01 PM
So brown wants the taxpayer to continue to fund the killing of “undesireable” “inconvenient” human being? I can’t stand this guy because he has no conviction or core principles. He is doing this to get re-elected and that seems more important than protecting innocent life… I’m glad I told him to drop me off his email list. I’m sorry I ever donated to him.
CCRWM on March 22, 2011 at 9:02 PM
The number of unwanted pregnancies will remain the same. The primary difference is that it won’t be my tax dollars paying for the horrific choice they make. Maybe you should think about something before you spout off, genius.
MadisonConservative on March 22, 2011 at 9:02 PM
This X2. Seriously stupid move there Senator.
Rocks on March 22, 2011 at 9:03 PM
Defunding planned parenthood will do neither.
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 9:04 PM
Or just sit home…or skip his name on the ballot.
SouthernGent on March 22, 2011 at 9:04 PM
ROFL…yeah, sometime when I have the time and inclination I’m going to have to go back to those Scott Brown threads and read all those orgasmic “Brown in ’12!” gasps.
ddrintn on March 22, 2011 at 9:04 PM
If you are serious, I really can’t help you.
Sorry.
Bruno Strozek on March 22, 2011 at 9:04 PM
MadisonConservative on March 22, 2011 at 9:02 PM
In my younger days places like PP were a very good source of free contraceptives and a place where people could be tested for disease.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:05 PM
When did this notion that a mother has a right to pay a hitman(abortion doctor) to murder her child for her become the normal moral standard? Do “woman” really believe that the life growing inside them is not a human being until it passes through the birth canal?
jawkneemusic on March 22, 2011 at 9:05 PM
Rino!
Oh, and behind all those “unwanted pregnancies” are lots and lots of innocent babies.
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:06 PM
Rino!
Oh, and behind all those “unwanted pregnancies” are lots and lots of innocent babies.
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:06 PM
Yep – I would.
First – you throw out a false assumption – that at least Brown votes with Republicans SOME of the time while Dims NEVER vote with the GOP. This is false – Dims do occasionally vote with the GOP – like Brown OCCASIONALLY votes with the GOP.
Second – how is it “fiscally conservative” or even “moderate” – to fund abortions through a special interest like Planned Parenthood? They all donate to Dimmocrits so here we have Scott Brown using taxpayer dollars to make a wealth transfer to people who will simply turn around and put that money into Dimmocritic candidates.
So that makes him a big fat dummy – but that’s not surprising.
Third – why don’t you think Mass voters won’t elect a conservative? I mean – a real one? Seriously – do you think conservative philosophy is so inherently flawed that the SMART people of Mass will never buy into it?
If that’s what you believe – then you are not really a conservative bro.
Conservatism isn’t just for the NASCAR crowd in the South buddy. Conservatism is the way the founders intended this nation to look like.
HondaV65 on March 22, 2011 at 9:07 PM
PP has always been about eugenics and ridding the world of the “undesirables” and blacks since its founding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger#Eugenics_and_euthanasia
jawkneemusic on March 22, 2011 at 9:07 PM
Assume for a moment that abortion is a bona-fide right. If it is, it is coequal to a right to speech, a right to publish (the press), and even a right to religion.
The Government does not provide us a forum for speech, nor does it buy us megaphones to allow an enhanced freedom of speech. The Government provide us neither a printing press nor a webserver to support our freedom of the press. Nor does the Government provide to those to have no religion — a religion. The Government provides the societal framework so that we, by our own exertions, can utilize those freedoms should we choose to do so.
So, by what convoluted thinking does the Government presume to provide abortions?
unclesmrgol on March 22, 2011 at 9:08 PM
Hey Bay State Brownie……..………just imagine the day you take your last breath and meet your Creator and you get to explain your vote to continue the Black Baby Holocaust in America.
Brrrrrrrrr, I shudder to think.
PappyD61 on March 22, 2011 at 9:08 PM
You mean contraception like this?
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 9:09 PM
Well, I enjoyed not seeing a Democrat win “Teddy’s seat”. But yeah, at least we’d KNOW where Coakley stands. The thing with RINOs is they’re unreliable.
ddrintn on March 22, 2011 at 9:12 PM
Brown knows he cannot possibly win reelection as a senator – the stars aligned just right, and the dems ran possibly the worst candidate ever, and he still only won by a few points. They won’t make that mistake again, and he’s going to get stomped.
But, Massachusetts loves them some RINO governors (Romney, Cellucci, Weld). He’s building up that delicious RINO cred for that job – guaranteed.
Rebar on March 22, 2011 at 9:13 PM
Wait… so my tax dollars should go toward making sure irresponsible sluts are disease-free?
spinach.chin on March 22, 2011 at 9:14 PM
The ones I used worked : )
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:15 PM
Your tax dollars will go to treat them anyway. It’s cheaper to put the money into contraception and protection rather than treating them later once they have something.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:16 PM
That’s nice, but you’re in the minority. According to PP themselves, 54% of all women seeking an abortion had used contraception during the month in which they got pregnant.
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 9:20 PM
Our tax dollars already fund STD testing at community health centers. Why should we pay twice?
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 9:20 PM
Actually, it’s much cheaper to not be a skank in the first place, thereby greatly reducing the risk of disease.
Don’t put the onus on me…
spinach.chin on March 22, 2011 at 9:21 PM
I doubt if the government defunded PP, that it would put them out of business. However, if it did, then they shouldn’t have existed anyway. Let the private sector support them.
GFW on March 22, 2011 at 9:24 PM
So you expect taxpayers to fund your lack of judgement?
Isn’t it a little despicable to not take responsibility for your own activities?
spinach.chin on March 22, 2011 at 9:24 PM
I think the Boston Glob had a recent survey that his re-election percentage was at 51%.
I’m so glad I did not donate to him. Oh, I tried, but his staff was so incompetent I could not even get a sign (which I was gonna pay for). So glad, like most things today it was SNAFU.
Oh, and there is a PP in Boston and I have noticed as of late that I NEVER see protesters anymore. Sad.
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:27 PM
Are you this wrong about everything else too? “Important services”, my ass.
I’ve never had an abortion, but there are two things I know:
1. You’ll have to live with what you’ve done while your alive. Good luck with the nightmares, cause it ain’t so easy to live with;
2. You’ll have to answer for it when you’re dead.
Naturally Curly on March 22, 2011 at 9:27 PM
OTS. (One Term Scott).
flyoverland on March 22, 2011 at 9:28 PM
Oh yeah I’m really irresponsible… making sure I am disease free and using condoms to avoid unintentional pregnancy. I’m sure without people like me in the top tax bracket who made use of PP services in college we would have a big surplus now.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:32 PM
I don’t think Scott Brown has ever tried to conceal that he’s pro-choice. Now, federal funding of “family planning” is a whole other matter. It’s just one on a whole list of things government needs to stop doing.
SukieTawdry on March 22, 2011 at 9:32 PM
Why is federal money for any private contraceptive service OK with Mr. Brown? Is he willing to pay for fertility treatments or viagra for those who want to have a baby?
unclesmrgol on March 22, 2011 at 9:33 PM
Good for him. The Republicans in congress are sad. We know what really needs to be cut in order to reach some fiscal sanity, and this drop in the bucket stuff is just political grandstanding to the base for the upcoming election. If they acted like grown ups and actually tackled the budget issue in a thoughtful manner, the American people would respect that and reward them with more congressional seats. Also budget cuts, if they are to have any permanancy, shouldn’t use petty political motives to decide what to cut. That’s not the way to go about it, and its not going to lead to a successful result.
But no, they go after small stuff like this that might help some kid from a crappy family more of a chance not to get pregnant and/or spread diseases, and they say Obama should have gone into Libya three weeks ago. This is stupidity. Go ahead keep listening to the stupid mouthpieces and refuse to look at things as they are.
LevStrauss on March 22, 2011 at 9:35 PM
I’m not sleepless over dead sperm but I’m touched you are so concerned over them.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:35 PM
SukieTawdry on March 22, 2011 at 9:32 PM
You’re right, but I remember him going on Laura Ingraham and she bluntly asked him about his abortion stance and he was less than forthcoming. In fact, his response was one ZerObama would have been proud of (ie…non-committing).
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM
SukieTawdry on March 22, 2011 at 9:32 PM
You’re right, but I remember him going on Laura Ingraham and she bluntly asked him about his abortion stance and he was less than forthcoming. In fact, his response was one ZerObama would have been proud of (ie…non-committing).
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM
How about just keeping your legs closed in the first place?
spinach.chin on March 22, 2011 at 9:36 PM
Well he’s popular her in MA. He was the star of the annual Saint Patrick’s day Breakfast. He delivered the best skewers of the morning by far and he was well received by a room full of the worst thieves in MA.
The line of the Breakfast was to the Speaker of the House. He said, later today you’re going to ride in a car in the parade where the license plate was likely made by one of your predecessors.
The second line of the morning was when he said, people keep asking me where the Truck is. It’s in Rhode Island. Senator Kerry taught me I can save a lot of money if I register there instead (reference to Kerry skirting MA excise taxes on his yacht by registering it in RI).
He was good. Whatever Dem they send after him is on a Kamikaze mission. They hardly even roasted him and that’s not like this bunch.
TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 9:38 PM
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:35 PM
Cute, but you know the post-ers gist was regarding abortion and not contraception. Why feign?
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:38 PM
Couldn’t resist.
Couldn’t resist.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM
The problem we have here is that money is fungible — it can be used for nearly everything. Since PP provides contraceptive services and abortion services, it’s impossible for that organization to assure that money given by the federal government is used only for contraceptive services not including abortion. The only way that can happen is that the organization providing non-abortive contraception is completely different from the organization providing abortions.
We’ve already seen, via Mr. O’Reilly, the mindset of Planned Parenthood — that funds directed solely to the abortion of minority babies (black babies in particular) are an acceptable contribution. Given that 30% of all black babies are aborted, Planned Parenthood has certainly met the goals of its “N**** Project”.
So, by contributing to PP, our own Government is killing black babies.
unclesmrgol on March 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM
He also got Capaono good too. Cap is the idiot who told the Unions to get bloody a few weeks ago. He said something like, my idea of getting bloody is coming here every year, Mike Cap has a different idea of getting bloody.
TheBigOldDog on March 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM
You can’t even imagine the distain I have for the callously pragmatic. You’re talking about human life.
hawkdriver on March 22, 2011 at 9:41 PM
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM
Well, hopefully others will resist engaging with you on this thread. That’s all.
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:41 PM
So you were irresponsible…
spinach.chin on March 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM
You’re right. It’s not worth it.
hawkdriver on March 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM
unclesmrgol on March 22, 2011 at 9:40 PM
I understand that and if PP merely preformed abortions I would be against them getting any funding but that is not what most people use places like PP for.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 9:45 PM
What happened to self reliance and responsibility? What ever happened to a little discipline or abstinence if one doesn’t have money for contraception?
CCRWM on March 22, 2011 at 9:45 PM
Just remember, the point of reference is Ted Kennedy – or whatsername, the lady he ran against.
AbaddonsReign on March 22, 2011 at 9:46 PM
hawkdriver on March 22, 2011 at 9:44 PM
Thanks Hawk, your post summed it up perfectly!
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 9:46 PM
The 17th Amendment – making senators 6 year representatives – really messed things up.
Brown’s just appealing to his constituency.
BowHuntingTexas on March 22, 2011 at 9:46 PM
I’m sure the world is better off without them.
Naturally Curly on March 22, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Remember we are talking about Massapukesetts.
CWforFreedom on March 22, 2011 at 9:50 PM
Liar.
Naturally Curly on March 22, 2011 at 9:52 PM
But what good is voting for Mitch McConnell’s position when it’s followed by voting for Harry Reid’s preferred positions?
Kensington on March 22, 2011 at 9:53 PM
Or, rather, what good is voting for Mitch McConnell’s OFFICE when it’s followed by voting for Harry Reid’s positions? I’m sure it’s a nice office, but there’s still a hell of a lot of damage being done by adopting Reid’s positions.
Kensington on March 22, 2011 at 9:54 PM
I could personally care less about Brown. He’s a (sometimes) useful tool. Far better than some generic commie.
But I hope hope the NRSC does not sink a red cent into his re-election.
That money can be invested to flip Dem seats in moderate to conservative states which will be far more reliable votes – like Missouri, Nebraksa, Montana, Florida, Virginia, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, and PA.
kevinkristy on March 22, 2011 at 10:02 PM
I have noticed that people like yourself are ugly and it shows. This is not about looks but what is inside.
CWforFreedom on March 22, 2011 at 10:10 PM
Doesn’t matter. Those of us who choose to abstain or stay committed to one partner shouldn’t be forced to pay for your “contraception” so you can go out and be a floozy.
jawkneemusic on March 22, 2011 at 10:12 PM
This. I’m so sick and tired of people treating a pregnancy like it’s catching a cold.
‘Oh, I got caught in the rain last night and woke up pregnant’.
That’s right. OUR tax dollars. Feel free to have nice cup of shut the f#$k up.
BigWyo on March 22, 2011 at 10:16 PM
Allah,
What, “uh oh”? Is this supposed to be a surprise? Scott Brown was all about the 41st vote against Obamacare, which the Dems rather messily avoided. Conservatives understand that he’s not one of us. I won’t be sending him any money in 2012 – all of my money goes to conservatives next year.
disa on March 22, 2011 at 10:18 PM
Let the libs fund Planned Parenthood themselves, instead of sticking taxpayers with the bill. In real life, you have only so much money, and you have to prioritze. If abortion is that important, then something else will have to suffer – like political donations, perhaps.
disa on March 22, 2011 at 10:20 PM
Massachusetts pays for abortions through medicaid, which even Michigan would not do. The Dems will stress the activities of PP to provide contraception, educating, screening and treating of sexually transmitted disease, Pap smears and all that, and demonize anyone voting for defunding as heartless sexists who deprive poor women of those services.
Defunding PP is a no go in liberal Massachusetts, and going the other way will mean Brown can lose the re-election. The defunding bill does not have a prayer of passing in the US Senate, so why should he commit political suicide to support a non-bill. You seem to have forgotten the election result of 2010 in Massachusetts.
bayview on March 22, 2011 at 10:20 PM
Heh. I think I like this one.
Aquateen Hungerforce on March 22, 2011 at 10:37 PM
BigWyo on March 22, 2011 at 10:16 PM
EXACTLY! I have made very similar comments while arguing with friends about the “right to” abortions. SINCE WHEN did it just become a forgone conclusion that once a girl hits puberty, she’s just gotta be out there getting her wheels spun off like an animal in heat? And since when was it the obligation of taxpayers to fund contraceptives and treatment for all the nasty crap you catch from aforementioned behavior? I guess it’s all a symptom of the immoral society we’ve become since the advent of “women’s lib”, one of the greatest tools the devil ever came up with.
Cornhusker on March 22, 2011 at 10:38 PM
Of course you do, liberal asswipe.
Jaibones on March 22, 2011 at 10:39 PM
Lex’s point is that, for any number of reasons, we live in a society that does not want to let those who live irresponsibly pay for their own mistakes. Given that as a starting point, it is much cheaper to try and help the irresponsible protect themselves than to try to pay for the treatment after the fact. Pretty simple cost/benefit given the parameters.
Aquateen Hungerforce on March 22, 2011 at 10:39 PM
Where is keep the change Goebbels at.
MadDogF on March 22, 2011 at 10:41 PM
Except for the fact that paying for them to try to “protect themselves” only results in more of the problem we’re trying to prevent.
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 10:45 PM
I would point out that I have not responded in kind to the many personal insults here and your point is better directed elsewhere. I chose to respond to a rather nasty accusation with a bit of humor and that doesn’t make me ugly inside.
lexhamfox on March 22, 2011 at 10:48 PM
Because he feels passionately about this country?
mmnowakjr85 on March 22, 2011 at 10:51 PM
Should the government also pay for me to have a gun and for lessons to help me shoot?
Why not? Gun ownership is a right, right?
Vera on March 22, 2011 at 10:55 PM
You didn’t respond to me… because you couldn’t…
CCRWM on March 22, 2011 at 10:55 PM
Mitch McConnell’s OFFICE
The GOP sucks, next question.
PappyD61 on March 22, 2011 at 10:57 PM
Despite all the whining here, I’ll still take RINO Scott Brown over ANYONE the Mass. Democrats nominate. A Mass Republican voting more than 50% with the Republicans in “Teddy Kennedy’s” seat still brings a wide smile to my face.
Yep, and I’ll send money to him again next time around despite his idiotic remark.
JSGreg3 on March 22, 2011 at 11:02 PM
Don’t care. It’s a matter of principle.
jawkneemusic on March 22, 2011 at 11:03 PM
Scott Brown has been voting with the Republicans more than 50% of the time … last time I checked almost 75% of the time. Sorry, but in Mass, that’s about as good as you’re going to get. Would you rather a Democrat voting with the Republicans 0% of the time?
JSGreg3 on March 22, 2011 at 11:08 PM
I think we knew he was a RINO when he got elected…but it was sweet to see a Republican win that seat back then. :-)
Dr. ZhivBlago on March 22, 2011 at 11:08 PM
CCRWM on March 22, 2011 at 10:55 PM
YEP! And how rich for someone to big-note themselves and then whinge when people call them out on their skankiness and lack of caring for those passionate about the unborn (and peeps are PASSIONATE about that!).
Some things are just not cool…but perhaps next time they should try HuffPo to find kismet.
Gob on March 22, 2011 at 11:10 PM
The little b!tch has no character,the only donation i’d make to him in the future is a set of knee pads.
heshtesh on March 22, 2011 at 11:11 PM
And before that they were the American Birth Control League, pushing eugenics through initiatives like compulsory sterilization. And right now, you can get free contraceptives and disease testing at one of the countless independent women’s clinics, or at private clinics.
Right now, there are more important issues than where you used to get your condoms.
MadisonConservative on March 22, 2011 at 11:14 PM
Unfortunately, your starting point is all too true due to incessant work by liberals for the past century at least. We have to start working just as hard to change the hearts and minds of all Americans so that that premise is no longer true. Scott Brown’s remark is merely reflecting the view of the average Masshole. If he wants to remain in the Senate, he needs to continue doing that.
JSGreg3 on March 22, 2011 at 11:15 PM
Candidates like Brown, Mark Kirk, Olympia Snowe, etc. are “Exhibit A” for not contributing to the RNC, NRSC or NRCC. Support the candidates whose views are the closest to your own.
In the senate race, Brown received support from the Tea Party and conservatives all over the country. In 2012 he will be on his own. It will be interesting to see if he sinks or swims.
bw222 on March 22, 2011 at 11:20 PM
No, I think perhaps YOU don’t get it. What has he voted on that actually benefitted us in the end? What battle has he won? Being Scott “41″ Brown did jack for us in the ObamaCare votes, and I am drawing a complete blank on any significant votes on which he differed from a run-of-the-mill democrat.
That he’s probably about as electable as you’ll see from a MA republican doesn’t mean that he’s above reproach. The criticism of him is that he’s not a republican at all– there were plenty of democrats who opposed ObamaCare, if you’ll recall, so even that is nothing that offers a major distinction.
RachDubya on March 22, 2011 at 11:29 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »