Imagine this: we get Mitt Romney elected president. A Supreme Court justice or two retires or passes away. President Romney gets one or two new justices approved and installed on the court. Conservatives rush a case to the court to overturn Roe v Wade. Roe v Wade is overturned thanks to Mitt Romney’s new Supreme Court. States around the country ban abortion and federally Republicans in Congress are able to pass legislation and send it to now President Romney to federally ban abortion. A bill which he’s said he would be delighted to sign.
Right, but we’re not imagining a totally dystopian future. We imagine them taking what Republicans now consider to be the Mitt Romney moderate stance on this issue in that they will allow victims of rape and incest special protection from the new government control over all American women’s pregnancies. So here’s a question that no one has yet asked Mr. Romney about his plan for abortion policy. This is a real practical policy question based on what he’s planning to do. It’s not about the radical side. It’s about what he’s portraying as his moderate side.
How is that going to work? How are you going to decide who specifically is allowed access to abortion in America? You have to have been raped to qualify, right? So who adjudicates who has been raped? Do you take every women’s word for it? What if the man who is the alleged rapist says it wasn’t rape. Do you take his word for it? Who’s word counts? Do you wait until it is adjudicated in court. How about if there is an appeal? How many week and months is that going to take and how many weeks and months can go by when you can feasibly still get an abortion while waiting for that process. Who makes that final ruling? Is it a cop? Is a judge? Is it a jury? Is it Mitt Romney? If it’s not the woman making the decision, who gets to make the decision?
Mitt Romney has a very specific policy position on abortion right and the Republican party is now trying to portray it as the moderate policy but nobody has asked him what that policy would actually look like in America.
Rachel Maddow, on her show tonight making an interesting point on a reality that hopefully will never come to pass.
Earlier today on Morning Joe, Mika Brzezinski called out Mitt Romney for his lie in which he claimed he pro-actively sought out female candidates during his term as governor of Massachusetts (the truth is that he didn’t ask for “whole binders full of women;” rather, it was an independent group that presented qualified female candidates to both Romney and his opposition). Calling out the lie (and yes, she used the word “lie”) is what journalists are “supposed to do,” Brzezinski said.
Joe Scarborough and Mark Halperin responded by condescendingly trying to mansplain to Mika that she doesn’t know what women care about. Laura runs down their juvenile responses here. In short, Brzezinski spent the entire segment trying to explain why workplace equality matters in this election while most (but not all) of the males at the table mansplained to her that she was wrong.
Mitt Romney: “We use Ann sparingly so people don’t get tired of her” (by Anne Onymous)
Geez, dude. She’s your wife; you’re supposed to like her.
If you put blank slate, empty suit, no opinion-having Mitt Romney into the White House, his presidency will be defined by whoever is standing next to him. And that means whenever you look at Mitt Romney you need to picture the ghastly visage of Dick Cheney lurking behind him and be afraid. Be very afraid.
Maddow’s EPIC Romney takedown, catalogs history of SKETCHY lies (by orangecountyfldems)
Mitt Romney has been a dick since at least age nineteen. For reals. From The Daily Mail:
A newly-unearthed photograph showing Mitt Romney demonstrating in favour of the Vietnam War draft might leave the presidential candidate feeling somewhat embarrassed.
The veteran Republican, then 19, can be seen picketing an anti-war sit-in at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, in 1966.
Romney received a draft exemption based upon his status as a “minister of religion” - basically, an exemption for having been a Mormon missionary. He received numerous deferments after that for educational reasons. Romney portrays his mission in Paris as a time of humbling poverty, but The Daily Telegraph has a different story:
The Republican presidential hopeful spent a significant portion of his 30-month mission in a Paris mansion described by fellow American missionaries to The Daily Telegraph as “palace”. It featured stained glass windows, chandeliers, and an extensive art collection and was staffed by two servants.
For most of 1968, Romney lived in the Mission Home, a 19th century neoclassical building in the French capital’s chic 16th arrondissement. “It was a house built by and for rich people,” said Richard Anderson, the son of the mission president at the time of Romney’s stay. Tearful as he described the house, Mr Anderson, 70, of Kaysville, Utah, said Romney aides had asked him not to speak publicly about their time together there.
Romney said of his French lodgings: “I don’t recall any of them having a refrigerator. We shopped before every meal”. Anderson said that as well as a refrigerator, the mansion had “a Spanish chef called Pardo and a house boy, who prepared lunch and supper five days a week”.
Romney added in his comments that “most of the apartments I lived in had no shower or bathtub”. He said: “If we were lucky, we actually bought a hose and we stuck it on the sink.” He said he was forced to use a hole in the ground and a bucket for a lavatory and said, “I lived in a way that people of lower middle income in France lived, and said to myself, ‘Wow, I sure am lucky to have been born in the United States of America.’”
Sounds rough, no? Perhaps it was this time of strife that led him to make his most recent housing decision:
It recently emerged that Mr Romney has plans to quadruple the size of his $12 million California home. The 64-year-old filed an application in San Diego, California, to bulldoze his 3,009-square-foot oceanfront mansion in La Jolla and replace it with an 11,062-square-foot property.
A campaign official said that the GOP hopeful was planning the expansion as the home he bought three years ago ‘is inadequate for their needs’.
Mitt Romney: Representing the 1% since 1966, lying about his poverty since at least 2011.
So this isn’t sexist, but it is honestly so fucking unbelievable and jaw-droppingly ridiculous that I had to spread the rage.
HOW IS IT EVEN HUMANLY POSSIBLE TO BE OUT OF TOUCH IN EVERY SINGLE DECADE YOU’VE BEEN ALIVE, I CANNOT EVEN