MR. MARC FISHER
13:06:41
From WAMU 88.5 at American University in Washington, welcome to "The Kojo Nnamdi Show," connecting your community with the world. I'm Marc Fisher of the Washington Post, sitting in for Kojo. Later this hour, we will talk to someone from the new African American Museum on the Mall about the creation of this new museum and the effort to wrap all of black history up in one building. But first, ever since Republicans completed their first clean sweep of Virginia's most powerful government positions last fall. Abortion opponents have been eagerly awaiting a chance to tighten restrictions on the procedure.
MR. MARC FISHER
13:07:29
Over the last few weeks Republicans in Richmond have moved to pass a bill that would require pregnant women to have an ultrasound image made of their fetus. Doctors would have to show the picture to the woman who would have to sign a document acknowledging that she had seen that picture. And abortion opponents hope that the image of a growing, living fetus would discourage many women from going ahead with a planned abortion.
MR. MARC FISHER
13:07:52
Well, somehow, through weeks of debate and public hearings on this issue. Legislators never realized that requiring the ultrasound procedure at very early stage of pregnancy meant that the procedure would not be done by the usual jelly on the belly technique, but rather by a more intrusive technique, trans-vaginally. Before you knew it, Virginia Republicans were being criticized not only in Richmond, but being lampooned on "The Daily Show" and on "Saturday Night Live" where Amy Poehler joked, really? Now, don't get me wrong, I love trans-vaginals. It's my favorite airline.
MR. MARC FISHER
13:08:27
And this has created a fierce political backlash against Governor Bob McDonnell and the Virginia government about the idea of mandating such an intrusion into women's bodies. Governor McDonnell has now, in the last 48 hours, changed his mind and decided he would not sign the ultrasound bill without revisions. Not exactly the kind of publicity the governor's looking for as his name is bandied about as a possible vice presidential candidate on a Mitt Romney ticket this fall.
MR. MARC FISHER
13:08:57
Well, here on the phone with us to discuss this is Stephen Farnsworth. He's a professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington. And Professor Farnsworth, this is not exactly the kind of thing that the government was hoping to have accruing to his benefit at this stage of the presidential campaign, I would imagine.
MR. STEPHEN FARNSWORTH
13:09:19
Absolutely not. The worst thing in politics is to be made a laughing stock. And Virginia right now has been declared ridiculous by no less than "Saturday Night Live" and Jon Stewart, the two biggest names in political comedy out there.
FISHER
13:09:36
And do you think that's the explanation for the governor backing off in this way?
FARNSWORTH
13:09:43
Well, this was really lose-lose for the governor. If this legislation had proceeded as originally proposed with the vaginal ultrasound, it simply would have been a problem to pass it, to sign it. And it would have been a problem to veto it. When you have a bad situation in politics, you need to cut your losses. And that, I think, is what the governor did here. It's not clear how the story ends, of course. They're trying to amend this legislation to salvage it.
FARNSWORTH
13:10:11
But the Republican situation is, you know, is clear enough. They control the levers of power. And so, if they can come up with something that they can all go with, there might still be some sort of ultrasound requirement.
FISHER
13:10:24
Well, let's take a step back and see how we got here, because obviously when Republicans won not only the governor, the attorney general, lieutenant governor positions, but also control of both Houses of the legislature in Richmond, there was, at least on the part of some social conservatives, a considerable amount of crowing about the fact that they were finally going to be able to move ahead with their social agenda that they had been itching to get for many years. And obviously abortion is high on the list.
FISHER
13:10:53
And so, it was entirely predictable that someone would come along with these kinds of proposals for restrictions on abortion that we've seen in other states around the country, including this notion that women should have to be somehow confronted with a picture of a fetus to sort of confront them with the reality of this life that is taking form within them. But somehow, in all of the preparation of the bill and discussion of it, the fact that this meant not only a traditional kind of ultrasound, but a more intrusive kind.
FISHER
13:11:29
And I should note that we'll be discussing pregnancy and reproductive choices in this segment. And some people who may find such discussions uncomfortable may want to turn down the radio for a bit. We'll be doing this for half an hour or so. But given -- how is it possible politically that the actual medical implications of the bill were not discussed?
FARNSWORTH
13:11:51
Well, I think that one of the realities, politically speaking, is that, you know, a lot of political decisions are being made on the basis of ideology, of personal commitment. And that doesn't necessarily lead to the kind of due diligence that might lead to responsible, careful lawmaking. I think that what you see with this Virginia Republican victory in the last election cycle is the great risk of overreaching.
FARNSWORTH
13:12:20
The last time the Republicans controlled all of the levers of power, back when Jim Gilmore was governor, the Republican caucus had a significant number of moderates in it, particularly from the northern Virginia area. And that meant that the truly conservative social agenda could not move through, because the Senate, even though in Republican hands, was still under moderate control effectively.
FARNSWORTH
13:12:41
What you have in this Republican caucus now is a much more conservative Republican Party. And as a result, the caucus is much more aggressive. And you can understand why if you look at the political dynamics of the last few years, you're looking at the rise of the Tea Party movement nationally and in Virginia. You're looking at a real strident conservative movement that has really been strengthened and built in reaction to the Obama presidency.
FARNSWORTH
13:13:06
And so, within Virginia, there was the great opportunity to overreach in many ways. And that's not something that's unique to these Republican games. And if you look back at the 2010 elections and the movement in Wisconsin that a newly constituted Republican majority created there triggered a backlash with recall elections. If you look at the new Republican majorities in Ohio, they tried to curtail the collective bargaining rights of workers in that state.
FARNSWORTH
13:13:38
And there was a public referendum saying that won't do. And so, you ended up with a situation where, in some ways, what's going on in Virginia right now is predictable in terms of the Republican risk of overreach. But so too predictable is the counter-reaction, the response that comes from the moderate voters who may not be all that visible in terms of talk shows or in political campaigns, but really are the decisive voters when you think about who wins and losses in elections.
FISHER
13:14:03
You can join our conversation about the restrictions on abortion in Virginia by calling 1-800-433-8850 or email us at kojo@wamu.org. You can also send us a tweet to @kojoshow. And we're talking with Stephen Farnsworth who is a professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington. There's a poll just out from the Richmond Times Dispatch and Christopher Newport University of Virginia voters that shows perhaps the predicament that Governor McDonnell found himself in yesterday when he was considering what to do about this.
FISHER
13:14:39
Nearly 6 in 10 Virginia voters approve of the job that Governor McDonnell is doing, whereas only just over 4 in 10 approve of President Obama's performance. So, clearly, Governor McDonnell, very popular, even at this stage in his term. But on this abortion issue, a slight majority of Virginia voter oppose requiring women to undergo an ultrasound procedure before seeking an abortion and a small majority also oppose defining life as beginning at conception.
FARNSWORTH
13:15:11
And this is the so-called personhood bill, which just this morning was approved by Virginia Senate Committee and this bill provides that unborn children, quoting now, "at every stage of development enjoy all the rights, privileges and immunities available to other persons." And there was a very strong opposition at the capital this morning when the bill was passed. People chanting: Women will not be silenced, and so on. Is the legislature overreaching here in such a way that the governor feels the need to separate himself from his own Republican comrades in the legislature?
FARNSWORTH
13:15:49
Well, certainly there's a concern that the governor has expressed for some time. If you go back to the State of the State address that the governor gave about a month ago now, he explicitly warned the Republican majorities not to overreach, to be cautious. And part of the reason for that, I think, is the issue that we've talked about already, the idea that McDonnell has national ambitions. And being involved in things that are very controversial could be problematic from the point of view of getting perhaps a vice presidential nod for a Romney ticket or something like that.
FARNSWORTH
13:16:21
But it doesn't seem like the lawmakers are really all that interested in the governor's national standing. It seems like the governor is in a very difficult spot here, where you've got a Republican majority, you've got Christian conservatives who, for years, have chafed not only at the Democratic majorities that existed but the Republican moderates within their own caucus who's kept the social agenda items from moving forward.
FARNSWORTH
13:16:45
And so, there's a great deal of pressure to move forward. I think if we look at it from a larger perspective, you might say it might be a lot wiser for some of these social items to have been discussed a year from now. After the 50/50 Kaine-Allen race has been decided. After the possibilities of Virginia's electoral votes going to a Republican or Democrat had been decided. I think that, in many ways, this Republican social agenda is undermining the party's prospects for the very close elections that we're likely to see in November 2012 for the electoral votes of Virginia and also for the U.S. Senate seat.
FARNSWORTH
13:17:22
A Senate seat, by the way, that may very well determine which party controls the Senate and Washington. It's a very high risk strategy.
FISHER
13:17:30
And all of that with Virginia being a swing state, a purple state going into the presidential campaign this fall.
FARNSWORTH
13:17:36
Absolutely.
FISHER
13:17:37
Let's go to David in Snow Hill, Md. David, you're on the air.
DAVID
13:17:40
Hi. Kojo, I think -- thank you for inviting me and letting me talk. My question about this procedure for the sonogram is if this is a state-mandated procedure that's otherwise unnecessary, medically unnecessary, then isn't the state and the taxpayers are going to foot the cost of that? I mean, the hospital's not doing it for free.
FISHER
13:18:07
Well, that's an interesting point. Professor Farnsworth, I did not see anywhere in the bill that the state was going to cover these costs for them.
FARNSWORTH
13:18:14
The state is actually not going to cover the cost. This is part of the reason why this is such a controversial provision, because the way that this would be covered would be at, basically in most cases, I suspect, from the woman involved. You're looking at a situation where insurance will cover medically necessary procedures. And if the argument is that in this particular case it's not medically necessary, that it's politically necessary, if you will, that you're not going to get insurance coverage for that.
FARNSWORTH
13:18:41
And so, not only would this be a procedure that would be conducted against the will of the woman, in some cases. But also, she would be forced to pay for it as well. It's very ironic that some of the people most concerned about government getting off the backs of Americans when the question was the Obama health care bill have come up to a very different conclusion about the level of government intrusion when the issue of course involves these ultrasounds.
FISHER
13:19:06
We will continue our conversation about abortion in Virginia after a short break. You're listening to "The Kojo Nnamdi Show." I'm Marc Fisher, sitting in for Kojo.
FISHER
13:20:58
Welcome back, I'm Marc Fisher of the Washington Post, sitting in on the Kojo Nnamdi Show. We are talking about abortion in Virginia, recent changes politically and restrictions that the Virginia legislature is attempting to put on abortion or access to it. And you can join our conversation at 1-800-433-8850. Because we are discussing pregnancy and reproductive choices, some people may find such discussions uncomfortable and you might want to turn down your radio and return to us in about 15 minutes.
FISHER
13:21:29
We have an email from Elaine saying "The story in Virginia is about bullying women and getting between them and their doctors. The rest of the analysis is secondary. That's not the core story." Another email from Katie in D.C. "What I don't understand is why it is only when the instrument is a phallic object being inserted into a woman that lawmakers understand that this is a harmful, invasive, over reach of government. This is the state attacking women's emotional, sexual and physical and integrity."
FISHER
13:21:58
And so, Professor Stephen Farnsworth, joining us. He's a professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington. Professor, obviously, this is a hugely emotional issue and one that does indeed effect how voters will go. Is there -- do you think the republican legislatures in Richmond sort of thought this through politically before going ahead with this bill?
FARNSWORTH
13:22:23
Well, I really think that the level of opposition that they've seen is surprising them. I don't think that any of them anticipated, oh, this is a way to get on the Daily Show. I think that what you see here is the nature of how different Virginia can be when you look at very different parts of the state. The conversation in the listening area around Washington may take a very different shape then if we were on a radio program in Lynchburg this morning or this afternoon.
FARNSWORTH
13:22:54
And so it's important to recognize that a lot of these lawmakers represent districts that are very, very different then Northern Virginia. The republicans, primarily in the legislature now, do come from outside of Northern Virginia. Once upon a time when you had more moderate republicans, you had a significant number of republican lawmakers who had more moderate politics and had to present themselves in a more moderate way to be reelected.
FARNSWORTH
13:23:17
Now, of course, most of the districts have been gerrymandered, drawn in ways that create very conservative sinecures for some lawmakers and then, of course, a few democratic liberal sinecures for some others. But, by and large, the lawmakers pushing these issues, the lawmakers focusing on the social agenda don't represent Northern Virginia. And, by and large, they don't have to worry that much about losing because the districts have been drawn in ways where if you can win the republican nomination, you can go back to Richmond.
FARNSWORTH
13:23:46
So much of the decision for who gets to be elected in Virginia politics is made at the primary stage, not at the general election stage because the districts are drawn in such a way is to favor one party to an overwhelming degree over another. And...
FISHER
13:24:01
Well and then there is even in a district that is slanted entirely in one direction politically, a legislature can still feel some backlash, but they're not going to feel anything like the backlash that a governor who represents the entire state and hears from a much wider variety of people hears from. And especially in this case where, you know, as you pointed out, Virginia has not been embarrassed to this extent on the national stage in years. Let's hear what John Stewart had to say on "The Daily Show."
MR. JOHN STEWART
13:24:30
And by the way, it's not that Virginia legislatures don't understand the concept of forced violation, the supporters of this mandatory ultrasound bill believe many things rise to that level. For instance, Virginia Republican delegate Bob Marshall believes that the health care reform bill, put forth by Obama, is not regulation of voluntary commercial intercourse, it is more akin to forcible economic rape. See, Bob Marshall feels like having to buy something you don’t want is like being raped. Oh, the cable package I want has to have the Lifetime Movie Network, oh, stop raping me.
MR. JOHN STEWART
13:25:05
Whereas having something shoved inside your genitals against your will is not rape. He thinks that's not rape. He's like a regional quark. Like some places of the country call soda, pop. I guess what I can't figure out is, whatever happened to the Republicans being the party of personal liberty? Don't they remember this guy?
PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN
13:25:26
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
STEWART
13:25:34
Yeah I got nine scarier words for you, I'm from the government and this wand's a little cold.
FISHER
13:25:41
Pretty harsh stuff and yet that's what republican legislatures in Richmond are having to deal with. And some voters are feeling like maybe they made a mistake. Here's Liz, who voted for Governor McDonald, is that right? Liz, you're on the air.
LIZ
13:25:57
Yes, I'm -- yeah, I made the mistake of voting for him because I'm in favor of smaller government and I want to protect individual liberties. I had no idea how someone can claim to have the platform of smaller government and want to invade and violate women in this way.
FISHER
13:26:14
And so you see this as the republicans being intrusive in a way that their own philosophy would tend to argue against?
LIZ
13:26:22
Exactly. It doesn't make any sense. There's no science, there's no backing to this. It's just to invade someone for the sake of invading someone.
FISHER
13:26:32
Okay. Thanks for your call. Now, let's go to Andrea in Rockville, Md. Andrea, I think you have a different point of view of this.
ANDREA
13:26:41
Hi there, yeah, thank you so much for taking my call. Yeah, I am pro-life and I find the opposition from the public and from NPR commenter's so far, a little hard to understand. Listen, I can understand why John Stewart made a mockery out of that hypocritical statement that you just aired. But I'm a little confused. You know, we've been talking a lot about the invasiveness of the procedure and I realize that your guest is, you know, is taking a political stamp on this and is talking about it from a political point of view, but these guys could at least talk a little bit.
ANDREA
13:27:14
I don’t know a lot about abortion. I know that I'm pro-life, but I do know that abortion has got to be painful and invasive. So in light of the fact that these women, these patients, are already going to see a physician about doing something extremely invasive to their bodies, what's one -- and I do realize you made a financial argument to that. That certainly stands. But just speaking to the invasiveness, is that really that relevant in light of the fact that these women are already about to undergo a very invasive procedure? Thank you.
FISHER
13:27:45
Thanks for the call. And I think those who argued against this procedure being mandated by the state were opposed to the idea that these were lawmakers rather than medical professionals who are determining when and under what circumstances a woman would have to have that invasive procedure. Stephen Farnsworth, I mean, obviously we're hearing the emotions on both sides but also some of the arguments that should've been had at the hearing in the legislature in Richmond. And apparently they never really got to this level of discussion.
FARNSWORTH
13:28:21
Well, one of the things that a majority is tempted to do is not listen very seriously to a minority. And that's the nature of politics, generally. Whether you have a democratic majority or a republican majority, there's often an attempt to shut down descending opinions. And that happens a lot. But, you know, in reference to the previous caller, I mean obviously, the lawmakers who are making these decisions can represent themselves for the choices that they choose to make.
FARNSWORTH
13:28:49
But I would draw your attention to an important distinction. When a person decides whether or not to have an abortion, that is their choice. When a person in Virginia has to go to a doctor and is required to have procedures that the state mandates and yet will not pay for, it strikes me as somewhat different a matter all together. Where, you know, individuals are making these choices on, with respect to the abortion question, what the law would propose, if it does become law, would be that the state would make these decisions. And the state would not be paying for them, but rather the individual would.
FISHER
13:29:24
And one of the groups that was most upset by this is some of the physicians who've said the thought that this was a matter of politicians usurping their role. Here's Nora in Annandale, Va. who is a pediatrician. Nora, you're on the air.
NORA
13:29:37
Hi, I am both a pediatrician and obviously I'm a woman and I just wanted to express my horror that in Virginia, they would consider forcing a transvaginal ultrasound on women. In today's day and age, such a backward policy is absolutely horrific. I am the mother of four children and having been pregnant, I had the transvaginal ultrasound. And I know that it's a very uncomfortable position and this is when I have been watched and with my husband holding hands, ready to have it. The idea of forcing it upon a woman is akin to raping a woman.
NORA
13:30:14
It is completely horrific and obviously the men who voted for woman to be forced to have this have never seen a transvaginal ultrasound or been with their wives when they had one. And, you know, to the other question that it's an invasive procedure and these woman are about to have another invasive procedure, you know, thank goodness, I have never had the other procedure, but forcing a procedure like this onto women, as a physician, as a mother, as a woman, I am horrified in the state that I live in.
FISHER
13:30:47
Well, we should point out that the bill was actually introduced in the Virginia Senate by a woman, Jill Holtzman Vogel, who is a republican senator from the Winchester area on the fringes of the Washington area. And she has said in recent days and hours, that she did not realize that the ultrasound that she was mandating in her bill would not be external, but would, in some cases, be transvaginal. So as a physician, what do you think of whether it's a man or a woman, politicians proposing or mandating procedures that previously were a purview of physicians to make that decision?
NORA
13:31:28
Well, I think the idea of an external ultrasound, while far less invasive, is completely useless because in early pregnancy, nothing can be seen externally. So, you know, it's a -- oh, we're just going to switch to an external exam, is obviously somebody without any medical knowledge because nothing will be able to be seen. You really need that, unfortunately, more invasive procedure to have it done. But it is not something that can be forced on a woman without being government rape.
FISHER
13:31:55
Okay, thanks for your call, Nora. Let's go to Elizabeth in Clifton, Va. Elizabeth, you're on the air.
ELIZABETH
13:32:02
Yes, I can speak about this on a far more personal level. I've always lived my adult life in a sense that I never knew truly what decision I would ever make if confronted being pregnant and had not wanted to be. And I was on birth control and that decision was taken away from me while sexually assaulted 19 years ago. And I don’t know if people are aware of this, but I know the exact date I was assaulted, I also know the exact date that I had an abortion. I will never forget that as long as I live. That was the most humiliating, degrading, painful, horrible experience I have ever gone through in my life.
ELIZABETH
13:32:46
I was counseled extensively by the clinic. They were very caring. They wanted to make sure that I had made the right decision. They just, you know, I don't know if people are aware that -- but you just don't go in and order it like a Happy Meal. It is an incredible life defining experience. And I want people to realize that women are not making that decision casually.
ELIZABETH
13:33:15
I am a mother of a child and when I was pregnant with my daughter, I found out, and I live in Virginia, that I -- my daughter, may have been a trisomy 13 baby, which is an extremely huge chromosomal disorder. And Virginia said I was allowed to have a second trimester abortion. It was legal in Virginia for this. And we went and had an amniocentesis and luckily everything was fine and I have a beautiful healthy child.
ELIZABETH
13:33:45
But I was counseled again and I have to tell you, even though I was counseled again and I knew all this and I was pregnant. Once again, my husband and I were faced with this opportunity of what decision were we going to make. And it was -- it was soul searching. And I said to myself my God, I don't know if I can go through this twice...
ELIZABETH
13:34:07
...in my life.
FISHER
13:34:08
Well, thank you very much Elizabeth. This really drives home the deep -- the intimacy and the deep emotional impact of abortion and of this whole issue. And Stephen Farnsworth at Mary -- University Mary Washington, as you see what this issue brings out and the kinds of reactions to what the politicians see as simply a matter of law, you have to wonder whether the republicans will now attempt a different path or will charge ahead. And what role the Presidential election and the pressures from the national party will have on the decisions that are now being made in Richmond.
FARNSWORTH
13:34:51
Yeah. I think that what you've seen with these stories from the callers that we've been listening to, the last few minutes, really demonstrate just how personal this is and how unique one's own personal experiences and feelings might be with respect to how to proceed in this situation. And I think that, you know, this is where, you know, lawmakers can look at an abstraction in terms of looking at an idea in the abstract level and not necessarily recognize the magnitude of profound personal feelings that might be involved with the lawmaking that they're about to undertake.
FARNSWORTH
13:35:31
And I think that, you know, it is a very difficult road for the legislature going forward from here because, obviously, the Christian conservative voters who put many of these republicans in office want something for their efforts on their behalf. The tea party movement also pushing for very conservative lawmaking, want to see something other than a capitulation here. So my guess is that the Republican majorities will actually try to come up with some kind of compromise in the days and weeks ahead.
FARNSWORTH
13:36:02
There's an effort to try to just use the external, I guess we could call it a jelly on the belly ultrasound, to deal with trying to satisfy some of these concerns. But it creates a significant problem in this legislative session. But in addition...
FISHER
13:36:20
Well, we're going to have to leave it there. But thanks very much Stephen Farnsworth, professor of political science at the University of Mary Washington. And when we come back, after a short break, we'll get into the African-American History Museum. Ground was broken this week on a glorious new building going up next to the Washington Monument. Well, what will go inside that building? We'll find out after a short break. I'm Marc Fisher, sitting in on The Kojo Nnamdi Show.
Transcripts of WAMU programs are available for personal use. Transcripts are provided "As Is" without warranties of any kind, either express or implied. WAMU does not warrant that the transcript is error-free. For all WAMU programs, the broadcast audio should be considered the authoritative version. Transcripts are owned by WAMU 88.5 FM American University Radio and are protected by laws in both the United States and international law. You may not sell or modify transcripts or reproduce, display, distribute, or otherwise use the transcript, in whole or in part, in any way for any public or commercial purpose without the express written permission of WAMU. All requests for uses beyond personal and noncommercial use should be referred to (202) 885-1200.
During a month when the abortion and contraception debate peaked -- again -- you would've thought the Sunday political shows would feature a larger than usual roster of female panelists, strategists and experts.
Not a chance.
There were a total of four female guests during the entire month of February. This bears repeating. Out of 56 guests on the Sunday shows,
only four were women. Four.
This statistic probably reminds you of
Republican Rep. Darrell Issa's contraception hearing two weeks ago in which his panel of witnesses was composed entirely of men who were summoned to discuss health care for, you know, women. In fact, on the following Sunday's edition of
Meet the Press, the all-male Issa hearing was
discussed at length by David Gregory, Paul Ryan and Chris Van Hollen, who we can assume are each biologically male. Smart booking choices.
Sadly, the men's locker room on Sunday morning is a virtual bridal shower when compared to the increasingly aggressive
He-Man Woman Hater's Club known as the Republican Party.
We begin with the voice of the party, Rush Limbaugh. The "Spanky" of the club.
Yes, I get it. We shouldn't pay attention to Limbaugh because he's a clown. He's nothing more than an over-drugged over-paid disc jockey who's performing a loud-mouthed Morton Downey, Jr. routine for the much coveted paleoconservative "market segment," as David Frum called it. All of this is true, but we can't ignore the fact that he controls the radio with more than
15 million weekly listeners. So whenever he says something awful on our public air, it has a significant impact.
For example:
"Why is contraception so important that it must be paid for by somebody else?" he demanded to know. He asked why contraceptives are "a must-have" in comparison to toothpaste, hotel rooms or a car. "Why are so many people afraid of birth?"
I wonder if it was the use of toothpaste to prevent pregnancies or if it was
his alleged inability to achieve an erection that prevented him from having children during any of his three marriages. Speaking of which, I wonder if his health insurance plan paid for the Viagra he was allegedly trying to
smuggle into the Dominican Republic several years ago. While we're here, I wonder why he needed ED drugs in the Dominican Republic in the first place without any female partners with him on the trip. And if he was indeed planning to have anonymous sex (just guessing) in the Dominican Republic, I wonder whether he considered contraception to be "so important" during that potentially dangerous activity.
OK, I'm grossing myself out now. Moving on.
Over the last two days, Limbaugh reminded us in no uncertain terms of his legendary hatred of women. Since his show began in the late 1980s, he's profited from attacking women and women's issues practically every day. The term "Feminazis" only skims the surface of Limbaugh's misogyny. Lately, he's highlighted his professional class and morality by teasing and
mocking the Obama girls. And
here's what he said this week about NASCAR driver Danica Patrick, who dared to express her support for the president's contraception law:
"She was talking, Danica Patrick was talking about Obama's contraception ruling. She was not speaking in general though it applies generally... She said, "I leave it up to the government to make good decisions for America." ... What do you expect from a woman driver?"
That's not all. Last week,
Georgetown University law student Sandra Fluke spoke to an informal gathering of congressional Democrats about the Jesuit college's refusal to cover birth control as part of its health insurance plan. Fluke told lawmakers that contraception can cost a law student up to $3,000 and a classmate recently lost an ovary because she couldn't afford the contraception drug that would've prevented the reoccurance of ovarian cysts. (How many "potential lives" were lost when that ovary, and its lifetime supply of unfertilized eggs, was removed?)
Here's what Limbaugh had to say about Fluke's testimony.
"What does it say about the college coed Susan [sic] Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her? It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps."
The most popular radio talker in the world just called an ordinary citizen a slut and a prostitute in front of 15 million people. 15 million Americans tune in specifically to hear him say horrendous things like that. Many of those listeners fancy themselves to be "dittoheads," meaning they blindly "ditto" everything that comes out of his increasingly slurred yapper.
And that's not even the worst part of this reinvigorated conservative war against women.
In state legislatures from
North Carolina to
Pennsylvania, Republicans are pushing laws that force the usage of transvaginal ultrasound probes to be inserted into the bodies of women who are in need of an abortion. It's a form of state-mandated rape and it's being mandated by the so-called "small government party."
And while
Virginia and
Alabama Republicans backed away from the transvaginal transducer, North Carolina already has a law on the books, and Pennsylvania is getting ready to pass its version of the transvaginal law. All of these states, irrespective of whether they keep or jettison the transducer, will continue to sanction the use of ultrasounds on women as means of intimidating them against having the procedure. Remember during the health care reform debate when Republicans blew a gasket over Medicare paying for end-of-life counseling? They said it was somehow shoving government into a private matter between doctors and patients even though it simply made this voluntary discussion affordable. But now they're doing exactly that -- shoving government into a private medical decision in the most literal sense imaginable.
Your modern Republican Party has decided that a one percent increase in taxes for multi-millionaires is an impeachment-worthy high crime, but the state-mandated insertion of an electronic device into the vaginas of women who are ostensibly struggling with the most difficult moments of their adult lives is a perfectly acceptable exercising of government power. (By the way, these are the people to whom Ron Paul -- the self-proclaimed guardian of liberty -- would hand the reins of, well, everything.)
Well before these new laws were introduced, including the personhood laws dictating that life begins at conception and therefore outlawing many forms of birth control,
hundreds of women across the country were convicted and sent to prison because they had miscarriages. More than 300 women in South Carolina. 40 women in Alabama. Illinois prosecuted a woman for manslaughter after she gave birth to a stillborn baby. As of June, 38 states had passed "fetal homicide" laws. The consequences? Pregnant women who are suffering from drug addiction or mental illnesses are afraid to seek prenatal medical attention for fear of being arrested. It's increasingly evident that being pregnant and in distress is almost as bad as being an illegal immigrant in America.
If Republicans were really interested in making it easier for women to carry pregnancies to term, they would pass laws to make the process safer and more affordable. Instead, they're criminalizing it. We can only assume they're not truly interested in fetuses or zygotes or babies who, by every other piece of Republican legislation, are on their own once they're born. They're simply interested in dominating and oppressing women because they believe women are genetically incapable of making difficult and otherwise very private life choices. Listen to Limbaugh's rants -- unburdened by the demands of politically correct language -- and the truth emerges.
Women are sluts and prostitutes. They hate their own biology. They're dingbats who can't drive. The words of the de facto leader of the Republican Party, preaching to millions of dittohead acolytes.
Again, why else are they passing these barbaric anti-woman laws and not laws that make pregnancy -- laws that make womanhood -- easier? We can only draw the conclusion that the Republican Party hates women.
