Why would anyone who cares about reproductive rights have been a Republican in the first place? An anti-abortion platform has been a mainstay in Republican politics since at least Reagan, and any libertarians for whom reproductive rights mattered should have jumped ship after Bush's first term at the latest. I'm sorry, I'd like to believe this but I just can't see the logic here.

Something tells me there is many more Republicans dissatisfied with McCain vs. Democrats dissatisfied with Obama. You just won't see them aired out on Faux Noise like Crackpot Harriet.

With their feet bound and their mouths sewn shut?

Lots of folks tempted to vote for Obama are voting for McCain because of Obama's extreme position on abortion - for instance, his passionate opposition to the Infants Born Alive Act. Yes, he wants the rare abortion survivor legally killed after he or she is born.

Charming.

These women are just now getting the message that their party is anti-reproductive-choice??

Or has the tedious predictability of a 5-4 Supreme Court split on nearly every issue finally waking them up to the fact that our rights are now really, really hanging in the balance?

I know Harriet. She is a very fiesty lady who has always been a very strong advocate for repoductive choice. Yes, I will have to admit some Republicans for Choice fell for the "Compassonate conservate" Bush. Now they have seen the light of day.

ON the other hand I believe those women who claim to be Democrats, who supported Hillary, are just anti choice supporters. Its not that they were strong Hillary supporters, they are running vicious ANTI OBAMA campaign.

I did a lot of research on anti choice and religious right groups in the 90s. My antena went up when I heard Cynthia Ruccia interviewed on CNN & Fox. She is the Democrat supporter of Hillary from Ohio who formed Women For Fair Politics, an anti Obama group. The way she dismissed Roe ve Wade , and the rhetoric about choice on this site smells of anti choice rhetoric. I don't want to accuse her of "guilt by association" but... Cynthia Ruccia a distributor for Mary Kay Products. Mary Kay Products is a business listed on the Concerned Women of America (CWA) site as a "biblcal" business. The founder of Mary Hay cosmetics is a BIG supporter of CWA and its off shoot Feminists or Life. Both CWA and FFL engage in anti choice and anti gay politics. CWA was started by Beverly Lehaye, (Tim LeHayes wife.)

Go to the Women For Fair Politics site. Hit the LINKS section See how it takes you to sites showing all the ANTI right wing Obama videos.

These women are RIGHT WING MOLES!

There is almost a zero chance that 4 years of a McCain presidency will affect Roe vs. Wade. There have been many Republican presidents since Roe vs. Wade and none have made more than a dent in the legislation. Prime example: George W. Bush is very anti-choice and he led the most anti-choice government in 1999 (in Texas) yet many women voted for him during two elections and he did not overturn Roe vs.Wade. So if Bush did not end Roe vs. Wade in eight years then a moderate Republican like John McCain has almost zero chance of doing so.

Before the religious fanatics took over the Republican party, in the 80s, the majority of republicans wre and still are pro-choice.

Some have left the GOP. Others just voter for Pro-chocie politicians.

McCain made a BIg mistaek trying to appeal to the right, by saying he wanted to overturn Roe v. Wade. Older republican womenl like Harriet Stinsen will vote for Obama.

Don't be fooled by Nancy Kallitechnis's comments that Roe V Wade will not be overturned. This is the latest ANTI Choice tactic. In fact this is this exact tactic that is being used on the Women For Fair Politics web site.

They are NOT HIllary supporters. They are RIGHT WING MOLES!!

On his very first day at work as president, George W. Bush reinstated what has been called the "Global Gag Rule." It says that international organizations that expect to receive any money from the U.S. Agency for International Development cannot provide abortions or abortion counseling even if they secure money for those activities from other sources. The rule was first implemented under Reagan in '84. It was reversed by Clinton in '93 and reinstated by Bush on January 22, 2001.

Bush wrote "It is my conviction that taxpayer funds should not be used to pay for abortions or advocate or actively promote abortion either here or abroad." Maybe Bush didn't grasp that an earlier law introduced by Jesse Helms has prevented U.S. aid money from being used directly for abortions since 1973.

Reagan, Bush 41, Bush 43, or McCain: you might think you'd like to have a beer with them, but--unless you are anti-choice--they aren't your friends.

Nancy is the cutest new Republican troll I've seen in a long time! You don't want him to cry, do you? His mascara might run.

What Republican nominee for President has not been opposed to reproductive rights?

Have they even bothered to read about the viewpoints of the candidates they supported?

Nice to see they finally get the message, but wasn't it obvious in 2000 and 2004 that Bush would, if given the opportunity, appoint justices who were hostile to reproductive rights (which is exactly what he did)?

This isn't the Superbowl.

Why do you need Team Spirit when the players are utterly inadequate and the team management is determined to further folly?

It isn't about being loyal to the democrats, because when have they been loyal to us?

It isn't about politics, either.

And the word is not bitter or angry or disaffected. It's sensible and pragmatic and logical.

It's about understanding how your vote represents who you are.

I am writing in Hillary Clinton on my ballot in November and there is nothing to stop any other American voter from doing the same.

I am doing this because I consider her the most capable of the three candidates.

Just because another candidate has been foisted onto the Democratic ballot does not mean in the slightest that anyone would have to vote for him.

But what it does mean to me is after a long lifetime of always having been a Democrat, I find myself among the older

(well, not THAT old) Americans who will go to their graves now considering themselves Independents.

But I thank both parties for freeing up so much of my news information time. I plan to ignore all the campaign bovine-manure as long as both parties can't come up with anything other than such a pair of improbable muppets.

I fully realize that McCain is going to be elected, but I will spend the next four years as I have spent the last eight. Having voted my conscience.

I'm use to it by now and it has given me great comfort that whenever I curse out the current administration it is with the knowledge that I have never voted for a single one of those swine.

If you did, why are you about to do that to yourself again?

Write-in the person, whoever that may be, who YOU think should be President of the United States.

It couldn't be a worse choice than Obama or McCain, could it?

-gala1