Chart of the Day

This chart, courtesy of ThinkProgress, perfectly demonstrates the consequences of having 39 out of 50 states legislatively controlled by Republicans.

Lawmakers across the nation pursued a record number of reproductive health and rights-related provisions in 2011, a new report from the Guttmacher Institute finds, enacting 135 measures in 36 states — “an increase from the 89 enacted in 2010 and the 77 enacted in 2009.” Sixty-eight percent of the provisions — 92 in 24 states — restricted access to abortion services.

And it isn’t Democrats that are pushing these laws.

Both sides are the same though, right?

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Abortion and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • maggy

    Anyone who says” both sides are the same” is either batshit insane or working for the Kochs.

    • Scopedog

      But…but…Obama’s worse than Bush, the Dems always sell out, and the only hope is Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich in 2012!

      …at least, that’s the response you’d get on most sites such as HuffPo, Smirking Chimp, and Raw Story.

      I do agree with you–the “both sides are the same” meme is so batshit crazy that I wonder why so many keep spouting it. Certainly the years from 2001 to 2009 would have shown in a cold, blunt way that the meme is, well, bullshit.

    • holyreality

      http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/making-choice-elections-context-and.html
      Digby makes a fine delineation between pragmatic looks, and idealistic stubborn stands.

      SCOTUS justices is the main reason to vote for the lessor of two evils.

  • i_a_c

    THE BEST way to stop abortions is to expand access to contraceptives.

    I don’t think Santorum will go for this idea, though.

  • MrDHalen

    “We need more white babies so we can deny them education & assistance services to keep them dumb & poor; which will help keep the GOP alive.”
    – The Republican Brain

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_YM23FX2FBZEC3UVDPZRGCUBIZ4 staci

    I read something a couple days ago that talked about Santorum and his stillborn baby Gabriel. According to this article, the Santorums were faced with making a decision regarding saving the life of either the baby or the mother. The surgery they attempted while she was still pregnant created a life threatening condition for the mother and although she was opposed to ALL abortions, the choice was her life or the baby’s life. I’m sure they did a lot of soul searching, but in the end they chose to save the life of the mother. Her rationale was that she had other children that would be left motherless if she died. My question is this: if this is true, why would Rick Santorum be against the right to choose in the same situation for all women? Is empathy not a part of their Christanity? I’m so confused.

    • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

      staci, you’re not confused….you are right on the money. They are completely lacking in empathy. Ironically, if the Santorum’s had their way, while the majority of the country would be under their draconian abortion laws, people like them would continue to get abortions….because they’re special…they’re not like us….thus the lack of empathy.

    • muselet

      Pretty mind-boggling, isn’t it?

      For what it’s worth, I took a shot at answering just that question over at Nicole’s place a couple of days ago.

      –alopecia

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    Some of these supposed liberals that are supporting Paul or anyone other than Pres. Obama actually make sense if you look at them closely enough. Take Greenwald for instance….most of the social issues where Paul disagrees with Liberals, will NEVER affect Greenwald and he knows it. Greenwald doesn’t have a uterus and will never give birth to a baby girl (he can adopt or get a surrogate mother, I suppose–but he lives in another country so IF he had a little girl, she would be free). Gay marriage? There might be some states that will continue to allow gay marriage but AGAIN it doesn’t matter, Greenwald lives in a foreign country. Get rid of the Dept of Education? Again, Greenwald isn’t here and if he did have kids, he could educate them overseas or pay for a private education. I could go on and on. I’m not criticizing the fact that he lives overseas, but I am saying that none of the other crappy ideas of Paul would really affect him as a result…..so he obviously feels free to support any crazy asshole that agrees with him on his pet one or two issues. Like Bob has said in the past, Greenwald has his priorities and no other Liberal priorities are even on the radar. He sounds like a libertarian masquerading as a liberal to me.

    As for Jane Hamsher, I have no idea what the hell this woman is thinking considering the draconian social stances of anyone on the right–many of which will affect her. Not to say she is supporting Paul, but she has been flirting with an alliance with the Tea Party and still discusses primarying Pres. O which would cause him to lose the election.

    Arianna lives here but she’s filthy rich and they always seem to get away with murder….so none of the right’s policies would touch her either.

    Can’t we just disown these crazy supposed liberals?

    • i_a_c

      Greenwald likes Gary Johnson, so Ron Paul must be next on the list.

      And I’ve already disowned these folks. They can take a long walk off a short pier as far as I’m concerned.

  • bleedingheartliberal6

    This is precisely why we need to work to elect Dems at the LOCAL level. The Master Plan of the GOP went unanswered, to a certain degree, by the Dems, and they were able to place a lot of GOP nuts into local office…..thus, creating their change machine from the ground up.