Comments on: The real reason Romney is struggling with women voters Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 By: TomatoCain Tue, 29 May 2012 17:16:45 +0000 OK… One thing I fail to understand is why folks tend to believe that the government is there to give them ‘stuff’. It’s not. The politicians are there to ‘take’, not ‘give’. But it’s not their money to give. Does anyone believe that giving the Government $1 will get you $2 back in ‘stuff’? Foolish as I am, I see the opposite happening as our hard earned tax dollars pass through several layers of sticky fingered beaurocrats before the ‘free stuff’ is distributed. The next time you pay for gas or groceries at ever rising prices, cheer up and consider that it’s just the rich folk’s cost of doing business and supporting the ‘free stuff’. (PS: I’m not rich, and Bertrand Russell was gullible to suggest the disarmament of GB in the 1930’s).

By: LoveJoyOne Mon, 14 May 2012 18:51:45 +0000 There are two types of Republicans:

1) The rich

2) The gullible

By: Mike113 Sun, 13 May 2012 04:29:06 +0000 This matters. It tells us about Romney’s character.

Romney claims he has changed; yet he still calls a mean, cowardly and vicious assault by five against one as a “prank”. So I don’t buy Romney’s story. Where is the real regret or remorse ?? Once a mean, cowardly and callous bully, always a mean, cowardly and callous bully.

The slick, older Romney may be more sophisticated about concealing the bullying side of his character; but somehow I think we are now going to learn a lot more about it, despite his best efforts to conceal it or laugh it off.

About Romney and cowardice: during the Viet Nam war, Romney did everything he could to avoid military service … even though he went on demonstrations in favor of the Viet Nam war. He didn’t want to be one of the 50,000 young Americans who lost their lives in that war — or the thousands more who lost their limbs. He wanted the war he clamored for, to be fought by the “little people” like you and me. Like Dick Cheney, Romney had “other priorities” for his life.

By: sandblast Thu, 10 May 2012 23:27:40 +0000 I’ve never seen such an angry, dismissive and insulting set of posts as those here. What’s up with this? The article is just a straightforward description of gender preferences and yet it draws a furious assault of misogynous comment. Whether you believe in conservative, moderate, or liberal social policy (or pragmatic which can be either) you can’t help but be taken aback by the overt hostility towards women expressed in some of these posts.

By: TexasBill Thu, 10 May 2012 21:33:41 +0000 Perhaps what we need to do is make men responsible for contraception. Put the burden of paying for what the men seem to want, control, squarely on them. Then birth control pills can be used for their other purposes, such as treating ovarian cysts and hormone imbalances, and paid for like any other medication covered by insurance.

By way, a look at the numbers might be instructive. There are millions more women than men in the U.S. There are more women voters and a higher percentage of them vote. If they put their minds to it, they are going to get who they want elected and what they want done. This is something Mr. Romney might want to consider.

By: zotdoc Thu, 10 May 2012 21:03:22 +0000 I disagree strongly with the portrayal of women as some monolithic block who have one or two overriding concerns. They are fascinating beings that God put here on earth to balance out the other half of us. I really fail to see how anyone has a “right” to take someone elses money to pay for (non)reproductive services. Women have a right to “control their bodies” but they should pay for it themselves.

By: eleno Thu, 10 May 2012 18:57:37 +0000 Fascinating. Article after article of leftist pap on Reuters. Their avowed task is to push the right leaning electorate left (and occassionallky Photoshopping images to bias war reporting).

The author, however, only mixes with like minded individuals who inhabit states that will be Democrat regardless.

But go out to the swing states and the story is different. Employment – or lack of it – is the main issues. Not gays, not feminism, not big government vs. small government, but jobs and standard of living.

And there Obama is failing.

By: JCnTN Thu, 10 May 2012 18:03:36 +0000 oops “successors”

By: JCnTN Thu, 10 May 2012 18:02:37 +0000 Here’s an idea: If a certain group of women don’t want men to have a say in reproductive issues then let’s abolish child support enforcement laws since that is directly related to the reproductive decision.

And yes my dears, there ARE people who want a Daddy state to pay the bills. Unfortunately, I am related to a few. The “not my problem” attitude towards their own foolish decisions annoys me to no end. One has a child who now represents the 5th generation of welfare dependents in that same branch of the family. A parent cannot teach what she or he does not know and cannot demonstrate what she or he will not do. The cycle ends when someone is encouraged to get off their ever fattening backside and be of service to the society that they think should serve them instead.

Remember, it was a famous Democrat who said “Ask not what your country can do for you….” Hmm…too bad his predecessors don’t care to follow orders.

By: proptr Thu, 10 May 2012 16:19:29 +0000 ( – 324,000 women dropped out of the nation’s civilian labor force in March and April as the number of women not in the labor force hit an all-time historical high of 53,321,000, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

This is the real reason why Obama should start packing.

And this is the reality Ms. Amanda should write about.

Nobody is against contraceptives. Just against another new free program on top of endless other free programs that make this country less and less competitive.