DWS: I desperately hope women’s issues come up in the debate

posted at 1:21 pm on October 16, 2012 by Mary Katharine Ham

All right, she said “fully expect,” but I think “desperately hope” probably characterizes the sentiment better since yesterday’s Gallup poll found President Barack Obama and Gov. Mitt Romney tied with women likely voters.

“I think they quite naturally will be a part of the debate, particularly because of the way the format is set up,” DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz told TPM on a conference call about women’s issues Monday. “Given that it’s a town hall, and you have a moderator who’s essentially just facilitating the questions and the flow of discussion, I would fully expect these issues to come up because given that the audience is going to include a number of women who share the same concerns that we do, that those questions would be put to the candidates.”

DWS attributes the race’s tightening among women to the fact that contraception didn’t take up its rightful 74 percent of the debate time in Denver. I assume it will come up in some form tonight, if only because Obama will be anxious to steer the conversation that direction. Exorbitant news coverage of the issue, sometimes to the exclusion of all else, means it’s likely worked itself into even late-deciders’ understanding of the race, so I suppose that means there’s a higher likelihood of women’s-issue questions from swing voters or from moderator Candy Crowley, who covers domestic politics.

But does this one-pronged outreach work for the women Obama needs to decide in his favor right now? I’d argue no, but let’s let Melinda Henneberg explain. She’s the author of the “She the People” blog at the Washington Post:

But from what I can tell, the Obama team’s effort to make sure women aren’t abandoning the president en masse seems mostly to be focused on still more talk about choice.

The president and his surrogates gleefully pounced on Mitt Romney’s supposed attempt to fool women into thinking he supports abortion rights, though that’s not what I heard him say. And the first lady looked like she was going to cry when she talked on the stump this week about how reliably, solidly and down-to-the-bone pro-choice her husband is.

But since women are as closely divided as the population as a whole is on the abortion issue — with 49 to 45 percent favoring abortion rights, according to a recent USA Today-Gallup survey – the appeal to us has got to be significantly bigger than that.
In fact, the moderate, late-deciding, majority-female swing voters who the campaign still needs to reach at this point are not really the best audience for the one-note message that even the most casual news consumer must have fully grasped by now.

Or, as E.M. Zanotti puts it, “Lady voters voting with lady parts may actually be voting for Mitt Romney:”

Shocking, I know. Women don’t like to be patronized and bought off with a carrot of free birth control from their religious employer dangled in front of them, are smart enough to have a detailed understanding of complex domestic issues (particularly those that impact their family’s bottom line directly), and the capacity for both empathy and analysis. I realize this is shocking to the Vagina Voter Squad, who routinely limit the female intellect to crotch- and empty-uterus-based considerations, but it’s true. I mean, I’m sure putting Paul Ryan in skintight golf shirts has helped, but it appears the change in polling has been almost entirely based on the fact that women critically evaluate candidates and their plans.

And, what if by some chance women’s issues didn’t come up with the questioners in the audience? Obama will no doubt pivot to them after getting a mostly unrelated question from a female voter. Then, you have a scenario in which President This Is What a Feminist Looks Like ironically reduces a grown, sentient woman on national TV to, well, her lady parts.

But who could blame him? The very hip lady co-creator of “The Daily Show,” Lizz Winstead, thinks women are nothing but a uterus, so why should he think any differently? Observe your official content warning for this video from LadyPartsJustice.com, and tell me whether you think it will appeal to moderate, late-deciding women:

The intro video for the site— the first impression it wants to give you— features a fleshy simulated uterus smacking a purported Congressman in the face. Because I know, when I’m making my political arguments, prosthetic sexual organs are always key. Makes it a tad awkward in a bar after work, but hey, whatever I can do for the cause.

Meanwhile, American Crossroads is taking a different approach, with $11 million behind it in Colorado, Florida, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia:

The ad campaign, set to begin Tuesday and run for a week in eight closely contested states, is part of a big push in the final three weeks before the Nov. 6 election…

The ad, “Sack It,” shows a woman watching one of Obama’s campaign commercials. “Mr. President, here’s what I want to know,” she says, asking about the jobs he has promised and wondering what the federal spending he has pushed for has produced.

She ends by saying, “My family can’t afford another four years like this.” The line echoes a theme Romney has repeated several times on the campaign trail in recent weeks — “We can’t afford four more years like the last for years.”

But how will they get the message without flying uteri?

Exit question (Allahpundit ™): Which party is backing a wife-beater for Congress in Ohio? Yeah.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

Sekhmet on October 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Boom, how does that taste Barky!

Nicely stated Sekhmet!

D-fusit on October 16, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Vagina Slims – You’ve come a long way, baby!

exhelodrvr on October 16, 2012 at 2:07 PM

As a sexually active wife, I can afford my own birth control, thankyouverymuch. I am insulted liberals would think they could buy my vote with birth control pills. Not only do they think my vote is for sale, they think they can get it so cheaply.

There’s your “womens’ issues, boys.

Sekhmet on October 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM

The basic liberal philosophy is that there can be no true freedom until everything is free. If you have to pay for birth control you aren’t free to use birth control because you might lose your job.

The corollary to this is that people who are not willing to pay for your birth control are therefore taking away your freedom.

PackerBronco on October 16, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Big Bird’s girlfriend has spoken.

It’s really all they’ve got. Hey DWS..check the expiration date on that Victims Express card. Until this “post racial” president took over, it was expired and all but forgotten about 15 years ago.

Thanks Barry..for taking us back to the 70′s again. Azzholee.

Mimzey on October 16, 2012 at 2:09 PM

I thought tonight’s debate was about foreign policy.
So what is it about tonight?
Everything via townhall forum?

Badger40 on October 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM

Tonight’s debate is both domestic and foreign policy in a town hall format. Next Monday’s is foreign policy only in the same format as the debate in Denver.

And somewhere along the line Mitt Romney will have an economic speech similar to the one he did about foreign policy at VMI.

Happy Nomad on October 16, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Exit question (Allahpundit ™): Which party is backing a wife-beater for Congress in Ohio? Yeah.

I thought this was about Sherrod Brown.

RickB on October 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM

I’m so disgusted by the whole war on women thing. What happened to Malala is the REAL war and makes American women sound like spoiled brats.

MaggiePoo on October 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Lady voters voting with lady parts may actually be voting for Mitt Romney:”

Eeeeewwwww. I hope they clean the touch screens afterwards.

I’ll cast my vote the old fashioned way: by hand. I’m just not that flexible.

Laura in Maryland on October 16, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Read my Lips – Giant Diseased Dancing Vag*nas 4 Obama! WooHoo!

Pork-Chop on October 16, 2012 at 2:14 PM

There’s your “womens’ issues, boys.

Sekhmet on October 16, 2012 at 2:03 PM

Something tells me you and Sandra Fluke don’t exactly see eye-to-eye!

Seriously, outstanding post.

And while it may not be an issue for you, I think the only thing you left out was the fact that our polarizing President has decided to use women’s issues as an excuse to destroy religious institutions in America. If I were a woman, I’d be pretty ticked off about being used as a pawn in Obama’s attempt to kill a key aspect of the First Amendment.

Happy Nomad on October 16, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Since DWS is probably helping Candy ‘select’ the questions, I’m sure that the ‘war on women’ narrative will come up.

slickwillie2001 on October 16, 2012 at 1:47 PM

.
Super Mitt should spin out of any of the HuffPo vibe Candy may encourage with his “ONE America” approach. When I was young, “Special Interest group” had a negative selfish connotation (and we didn’t trust the govt. either- now we can’t live without the Govt).

Segregating and isolating America into special individual groups the way the proggies have done only promotes failure for others. And it is polar opposite of the American people controlling OUR country, instead deferring control to a central government to take care of individual wants. Trading Liberty for special interest is discriminatory to a greater good.

Mitt needs to explain this Progressive agenda of division Hopey supports, is a path to failure.

FlaMurph on October 16, 2012 at 2:16 PM

V a g ina Slims – you’ve come a long way, baby!

exhelodrvr on October 16, 2012 at 2:16 PM

The whole war on women and 47% lines of attack may work on a campaign commercial but I don’t see how they are not blown out of the water when Romney gets to answer them in a debiate. So, I agree with DWS, I hope women’s issues do come up tonight but I think the outcome will be far different than she does. Contraception leads right into religious liberty and Obamacare, tread carefully Debs.

Ellis on October 16, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Hey, DWS, would you consider the Obama administration’s constant lies to be a “woman’s issue”?

BIDEN AT DEBATE: ‘We are leaving in 2014. Period’…

STATE DEPT: Negotiations to keep troops in Afghanistan past 2014…

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/10/16/state_department_official_negotiations_to_extend_us_troop_presence_in_afghanistan_s

Resist We Much on October 16, 2012 at 2:23 PM

They got a name for the winners in the world
I want a name when I lose
They call Alabama the Crimson Tide
Call me Deacon Blues

—Steely Dan

claudius on October 16, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I desperately hope women’s issues come up in the debate someone wants to use my lady parts soon.

BobMbx on October 16, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Let me see if I understand.

For liberals there are “women’s issues” and these are the only thing women should worry about… and they don’t include debt, or budget, or employment issues because women shouldn’t have to think about those things?

And I’m the one who is a misogynist? Really?

gekkobear on October 16, 2012 at 2:33 PM

… it appears the change in polling has been almost entirely based on the fact that women critically evaluate candidates and their plans.

Gee, ya think???

(shh… don’t tell the lefties… it’s better if they don’t notice…)

Mary in LA on October 16, 2012 at 2:37 PM

The lady in the video is kinda hawt.

But what a stupid video.

UltimateBob on October 16, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Oh Please, not this hunk of worthless tissue again.

rjoco1 on October 16, 2012 at 2:45 PM

yes, please bring up Fluke, and why the govt should stay out of people’s bedrooms, but write a check for the activity in them

the real war on women is Obama forcing Hillary to fall on the sword for the Libya lies

burserker on October 16, 2012 at 2:50 PM

I thought tonight’s debate was about foreign policy.
So what is it about tonight?
Everything via townhall forum?

Badger40 on October 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM

All questions are supposed to have been offered by the chosen audience.
THEN, Crowley will choose from that bunch.
Swell.

pambi on October 16, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I thought tonight’s debate was about foreign policy.
So what is it about tonight?
Everything via townhall forum?

Badger40 on October 16, 2012 at 2:02 PM

All questions are supposed to have been offered by the chosen audience.
THEN, Crowley will choose from that bunch.
Swell.

pambi on October 16, 2012 at 2:52 PM

Democratics will be working hard to pack that audience like they did in 2008. Remember that after investigating the background of the ‘uncommitted questioners’ several of them turned out to be hardcore democratic operatives.

slickwillie2001 on October 16, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Clock Stopping Ugly.

Harry S on October 16, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Bring it.

vcferlita on October 16, 2012 at 3:22 PM

So do I, women unemployment is at an all time high…women are losing their homes at a record clip…their gasoline prices are going up astronomically…and the drop out rate of their children, the divorce rate, all increasing…everything else is minor compared to putting food on your table, being safe, paying your mortgage, having your children properly schooled, and having a home not split apart…

Ummmmm, Debbie, you were saying what about contraceptives and how important they are to women trying to make a living???

right2bright on October 16, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Observe your official content warning for this video from LadyPartsJustice.com, and tell me whether you think it will appeal to moderate, late-deciding women:

Um…..Yeah…..that was creepy. I don’t know who it would appeal to.

What I do know is that it sets up a false proposition. The woman, presumably single but maybe not because men don’t have a say in these things, states that she wants to kill the child because she isn’t emotionally or financially able to have a child at this time. The reality is that she may not be emotionally or financially able to RAISE a child but he can certainly have it. My brother and his wife just adopted through a group that matches up pregnant women with families that want to adopt. It is apparently a rarity to adopt American children because the follow-up question that most often comes up is what country did you adopt from? I would argue that there are plenty of loving families that would adopt if we do indeed strive to make abortion rare. But, of course, that flies in the face of the liberal agenda.

Happy Nomad on October 16, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Hmmm…

Why didn’t these “LadyParts” folks show the actual abortion? Not funny enough?

Common Sense Floridian on October 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM

…I would fully expect these issues to come up because given that the audience is going to include a number of women who share the same concerns that we do…”

I think what she meant was this:
“I would fully expect these issues to come up because given that the audience is going to include we’ve planted a number of registered democrat women in the audience, who share the same concerns that we do…”

Hill60 on October 16, 2012 at 3:39 PM

As far back as Reagan, Democrats have been warning us that the election of a Republican would mean the end of Roe v Wade. And yet…

Reagan didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Reagan’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.

So now we’re supposed to believe Romney will get rid of it?

hawksruleva on October 16, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Remember that after investigating the background of the ‘uncommitted questioners’ several of them turned out to be hardcore democratic operatives.

slickwillie2001 on October 16, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Oh c’mon. I’m sure everyone around Hofstra is a committed centrist, who is equally suspicious of each party.

hawksruleva on October 16, 2012 at 3:52 PM

The culture of Barach Obama is to expect women to keep getting abortions until the economy is to his liking to announce the time for Profit has returned, or to allow them to have a family, hopefully a one half footprint kind of child that nibbles on tofu and lentils and other sustainable green food, you know he really is not in favor of YOUR reproductive freedom. Oh, and the kids should not ever get Christmas presents.

Fleuries on October 16, 2012 at 3:54 PM

As far back as Reagan, Democrats have been warning us that the election of a Republican would mean the end of Roe v Wade. And yet…

Reagan didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Reagan’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.

So now we’re supposed to believe Romney will get rid of it?

hawksruleva on October 16, 2012 at 3:51 PM

Let’s put something in perspective. Getting rid of Roe v. Wade would not outlaw abortions. It would make it a state issue- WHERE IT RIGHTFULLY BELONGS.

Happy Nomad on October 16, 2012 at 4:02 PM

“Womens issues” in Democrat Language is

- Abortions: unlimited free ones please. Preferably available at drive-thrus.
- Contraception: unlimited free in every flavor

CorporatePiggy on October 16, 2012 at 4:13 PM

The basic liberal philosophy is that there can be no true freedom until everything is free.

As a lifetime hunter and a hater of Godless-liberalism (a redundancy), I think you may have missed the entire purpose of what free really is. It’s bait!

After the little girl gets the free candy from the dirty old man, comes the unmentioned walk in the woods.

With liberals, all free stuff stops the moment they attain control, and they are about there in America now.

I seriously worry about the one issue that appears to be a mere by-product, almost a throwaway line of the GOP attack, and that is freedom. The loss of freedom is the one card that can even scare liberals into awakening. Jobs well…not so much.

Don L on October 16, 2012 at 4:16 PM

s far back as Reagan, Democrats have been warning us that the election of a Republican would mean the end of Roe v Wade. And yet…

Reagan didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Reagan’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.
Other Bush’s 2nd term didn’t get rid of Roe v Wade.

So now we’re supposed to believe Romney will get rid of it?

hawksruleva on October 16, 2012 at 3:51 PM

I truly believe that the GOP uses Roe v Wade as bait for the social con vote in the same way the liberals use black poverty as their push button vote-getting issue.

Neither can afford to actual solve those issues without risking losing their voting constituencies that support those issues.
Expect no attempt at stopping Roe v Wade and the number of innocent lives now far exceeding the death toll of all the 20th century despots combined.

Aren’t we a proud nation to be in first place?

Don L on October 16, 2012 at 4:22 PM

All this lady parts talk over the past couple of months makes me long for the days when such discussions were forbidden in polite company. It used to be that they weren’t discussed outside of your doctor’s office but I guess nothing should surprise me about the degradation of our culture.

It’s ironic that the feminism movement started with the admirable goal of having women equal to men in the workplace but has degraded to standing for women as body parts. Disgusting really.

Common Sense on October 16, 2012 at 4:29 PM

It’s ironic that the feminism movement started with the admirable goal of having women equal to men in the workplace but has degraded to standing for women as body parts. Disgusting really.

Common Sense on October 16, 2012 at 4:29 PM

It could never be what the idealistic goal was. Women like Bella Abzug and Gloria Steinem assumed to speak for all women, including the June Cleavers’ and Wilma Flintstones’ of the planet. When it became apparent that the ERA movement wasn’t supported by all women and faced resistance, the only option was to go negative, as all progressive movements do, find a villain and then attack it in the name of all women.

The argument of “The War on Women” is so bereft of merit that the WH itself is forced to handout free rubbers as proof of the villainous GOP. “Equality” is no longer the message. It has morphed into a sinister fantasy.

BobMbx on October 16, 2012 at 4:40 PM

What the hell has a womens’ parts got to do with running the government?

mixplix on October 16, 2012 at 4:43 PM

If I walk into my polling place on election day and see a bunch of disembodied democrat LADY PARTS waiting in line to vote, I’m going to scream.

Pork-Chop on October 16, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Oh please, please waste a lot of time talking about women’s issues, contraception, immigration, ie, topics that voters don’t give a crap about for this election cycle.

If that’s what happens tonight then Romney’s victory is assured.

tkyang99 on October 16, 2012 at 4:53 PM

Read her lips: No new waxes.

SouthernGent on October 16, 2012 at 4:53 PM

DWS -

You mean women’s issues like the US negotiating with folks who think an impoverished 14 year old girl wanting an education is worth a hit squad? Those women issues?

Or are you talking about the rich &itch who can’t keep her legs shut and want us to pay for her contraception, and if that fails, her abortion, just so that she can feel good about herself?

EdmundBurke247 on October 16, 2012 at 4:58 PM

I liked something Ryan said, but don’t remember it verbatim, something to the effect of, “There is no legislation pending related to abortion of which I am aware.”

And, in that vein, to borrow a Sarah Palin theme, coming from someone who’s very specific about her beliefs in this area, the President of the United States cannot overturn Roe v. Wade.

This President, Barack Obama, can materially affect your life, and the life your children might or might not have. He’s doing it every day, tugging on the big wheel, trying as hard as he can to turn the ship of state toward the European Socialist model (and, IMO, directly toward the iceberg).

Again, as Palin has said on many occasions, she and other women have much more in common than they do differences. The foundations of our republic, our economic viability, a future for our kids, energy policy, a host of vital issues. For my two cents, I’d be willing to pay for my condoms if I could secure my nation’s future.

All I’m saying is, clamoring for a discussion of “women’s issues” can easily backfire. Women I know care about the same things men care about, outside of a few gender-specific areas which the President of the United States does not dictate.

IndieDogg on October 16, 2012 at 5:08 PM

Whenever I see a comment by DWS and her picture, all I see is Alfred E. Neuman from MAD magazine. I cannot take anything this woman says seriously.

RAN58 on October 16, 2012 at 5:10 PM

Any woman who is more concerned with her cooz than an Obama dictatorship is a fool.

disa on October 16, 2012 at 5:14 PM

I hope it comes up tonight, too, so Romney can remind Americans that the ‘war on Women’ is nothing more than a campaign strategy designed to distract them from the fact that Obamacare violates the Constitution by mandating medical facilities run by religious institutions hand out free contraceptives & ABORTION-INDUCING DRUGS!

easyt65 on October 16, 2012 at 5:15 PM

If there ever was a woman with issues, DWS is it.

ghostwalker1 on October 16, 2012 at 5:19 PM

#CrowleyTheHutt gets her marching orders from DWSweets

DANEgerus on October 16, 2012 at 5:19 PM

I hope it comes up tonight, too, so Romney can remind Americans that the ‘war on Women’ is nothing more than a campaign strategy designed to distract them from the fact that Obamacare violates the Constitution by mandating medical facilities run by religious institutions hand out free contraceptives & ABORTION-INDUCING DRUGS!

easyt65 on October 16, 2012 at 5:15 PM

And, your husbands have no jobs not because of me.

Valley Girl DWS, like for sure!

jjnco73 on October 16, 2012 at 5:31 PM

What the hell would she know about a woman’s issue ?

Wade on October 16, 2012 at 6:07 PM

Debbie, is Barry BAMSTAHHHHHHH!!!!! YOU DA MANNNNNNNNNNN BAMMMMMMMY BABYYYY!!! LOVE YA BARRY OL BUDDY OL PALLLLLLL!!!!!! YAHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Marx:36 PM

cableguy615 on October 16, 2012 at 6:08 PM

Paul Ryan in skintight golf shirts has helped

Link, please. I want to be a fully informed voter.

talkingpoints on October 16, 2012 at 6:23 PM

DWS Driving While Stupid = death penalty

rik on October 16, 2012 at 6:24 PM

France to Cover 100 Percent of the Cost of Abortions

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/330535/france-cover-100-percent-cost-abortions-veronique-de-rugy

Let them all move to France where they are also Muslim loving tax hikers…..

Hell, this country sounds perfect for Obama and his cronies…..

redguy on October 16, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Do they never stop to think that a whole lot of us women … er, excuse me, womyn … are long past the contraception years? We’re more interested in our retirement, or our husbands’ retirement, or our children’s and grandchildren’s futures, or, believe it or not, the future of the nation. Birth control and abortion are concerns for some women, but not ALL women. Not even a majority, I’d say, since contraception is easily available, and abortion is still easy to get if you want one.

DEMOCRATIC PARTY, SHUT UP ABOUT LADY PARTS!!!

RebeccaH on October 16, 2012 at 7:09 PM

They got a name for the winners in the world
I want a name when I lose
They call Alabama the Crimson Tide
Call me Deacon Blues

—Steely Dan

claudius on October 16, 2012 at 2:24 PM

I don’t quite get the reference, but anytime is a good time to quote Steely Dan.

Grace_is_sufficient on October 16, 2012 at 7:25 PM

I hope Obama goes on a tangent and mumbles some horrendous medical-textbook lady parts word:

Like, “Uhhhh when you, when you have to get an ultrasound…not, uhhhhh, you know, uhhhh, the one through the belly, but the one they put in your vagina…uhhh”

Please, God?

Grace_is_sufficient on October 16, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Debbie Wasserman Shultz, Nancy Pelosi, and Candy Crowley, are proof that there IS such a thing as Vagina-Based Life-Forms.

bigmike on October 16, 2012 at 8:41 PM

DWS: I desperately hope women’s issues come up in the debate

…why?…does DWS think of herself as a woman?

KOOLAID2 on October 16, 2012 at 8:56 PM

Again, proof of my theory that persons who chose to be hyphenated (Wasserman – Schultz) suffers from a severe form of being able to meet reality face on.

If you remember (Col. Klink and Sgt Schultz). The truthful Schultz would always tell the truth with his response of “I saw nothing, I heard nothing, I know nothing”, which epitomizes Rep. Wasserman – Schultz. views her job and the World.

MSGTAS on October 17, 2012 at 8:55 AM

Well, that woman sure does have issues!

MelonCollie on October 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I wonder if there has been any credible studies that follow up on the woman that choose NOT to abort because of the information they have received in that office visit confirming their pregnancy.

Hard to believe that 100% of ALL woman still choose to abort when given an opportunity to understand they actually have a small human forming in their LADY PARTS.

ActinUpinTexas on October 17, 2012 at 1:53 PM

Comment pages: 1 2