I would bet that the Violence Against Women Act was written with you in mind Michael. You and that ridiculous goatee are probably on the cover. From what I can see from the voting record this year, it isn't that republicans hate women, they just don't like them very much, and will coexist with them as long as they keep getting them another beer.

Remind me again how it is that some Republicans/TPers have a very difficult time understanding the difference between consensual and un-consensual. Perhaps if they could just figure it out, the wouldn't need to redefine rape.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/01/whats-behind-the-drive-to-redefine-rape_n_816967.html

Nice "goatee" Michael...your mom trim that for you?

Not only do Republicans want the ability to beat women without consequence, they are now advocating beating children. Weird, can't abort an unwanted child, but is sure is OK to beat the hell out of them after they are born, all in the name of God by the way. Warning, this video is sick, the minister yells, "give 'em a punch".

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/#47273096

Conservatives can whine about the war on women all they want, but it's real. It's all part of keeping as many people down as possible in order to keep those riches flowing to the 1% at ever increasing speed.

You morons are hilarious!

NOT ONE refute of "Blue Dress" Clinton (which was/is 100% true) ~ instead we get delighted with who knows and who cares...lmao

No wonder you lost your super majority after only one term and continue to get slammed......onslaught 2012 coming in November!

Looney Libs = DumbFux....lol

Justice for Zimmerman!

Nice "goatee" Michael...your mom trim that for you?

Is the goatee thing the new Republican/Neo-Nazi symbol? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#47288639

I've got to hand it to you Michael for fitting that much hatred, bigotry and ignorance into a few lines. Go crack open another cold one. Are there women in your life? I doubt it, but if there are, God help them.

Michael is well acquainted with flogging his..., or spanking the....

No woman would pay this guy any attn.

How is your parents basement?

Nice "goatee" Michael...your mom trim that for you?

I see she still hasn't bleached his @!$%# yet!

[No wonder you lost your super majority after only one term...]

Uh, Micheal...remember how you were schooled on your "supermajority" bullcrap?

Sure you do...don't you, Michael...

You betcha...wink wink...

Oh, and nice goatee...very...uhm...Metro-sexual...

Michael#69hismamma - Here's a fact I want you to refudiate. In the past 40 years since Roe v. Wade was passed there were approximately 900 anti-women's health/ anti-abortion bills passed nationwide. In the past 2 years (since the anti-woman TeaPubicHair party got elected nationwide) there have been OVER 900 anti-woman's health/anti-birth control/anti-abortion bills passed nationwide.

To use the "out-of-touch" Republican colloquialism - 'I'll bet you $10,000' that you cannot find anyone to condone Clintons actions.

I'll give you 30 minutes to come up with an intelligent explanation of my first point. But I have $10K that says you can't/don't.

I thought Obama is waging a war on women with rapper visits to the white house for Michelle's poetry parties.

You know about rappers and their demeaning rants toward women don't you.

RedDevPSA link to a leftwing website, get real LOL.

There was not a filibuster proof majority in the Senate!

I'll repeat this again, just for you and all the others that continue with the Senate Super Majority lie. Here are the facts for you about "control" of the Senate. A party majority does not give you control when it comes to the Senate rules of filibuster. Every bill must have 60 votes to pass.

President Obama spoke about collective amnesia and rightly so. Apparently, there is an epidemic of selective amnesia concerning the 2009 and 2010 Senate "Super Majority".

For those who persist in the Senate Super majority lie of the 111th Congress and the continuing obstruction of the 112th Congress. So, how did anything get passed?( ie. Healthcare Reform, unemployment benefit extensions, payroll tax cuts) Ah, that dirty word -compromise. Even then and today, every bill needed votes from the Independents, Blue dog Dems and Republicans.

No matter how many times you repeat that Super Majority lie it is still a lie. Did everyone forget the Blue Dog Dems (ie. Evan Bayh, Nelson,etc?) In fact, they never had a Democratic Senate super majority because of Blue dog Dems & Leiberman(I. Conn), just another pissed off Independent that consistently votes with the Republicans even though he will caucus with the Dems. He backed McCain, didn't he?

There was never a "Senate Super Majority". The GOP/TP has set a historical record for the number of filibusters in this administration and it still continues to obstruct any bills to move us forward.

The Senate Super majority myth

January 3, 2009 - 111th Congress sworn in. 55 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

January 15, 2009 - Roland Burris sworn in to Barack Obama's seat. 56 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 2 vacant.

April 30, 2009 – Arlen Specter changes parties. 57 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

July 7, 2009 – Al Franken seated. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A
60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED BOTH INDEPENDENTS.

August 25, 2009 – Teddy Kennedy dies. Kennedy had missed 97% of the votes in 2009 and over 90% in the last half of 2008. 57 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

September 25, 2009 – Paul Kirk appointed to Teddy Kennedy's seat. 58 Democrats, 40 Republicans, 2 Independents.

THIS IS THE SECOND TIME THE DEMOCRATS HAD A SHOT AT A 60-VOTE MAJORITY AND STILL NEEDED THE INDEPENDENTS.

February 4, 2010 – Scott Brown sworn in to replace Paul Kirk. 57 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents.

June 28, 2010 – Robert Byrd dies. Byrd had missed over 90% of the votes in 2010 and almost 50% in 2009 due to illness. 56 Democrats, 41 Republicans, 2 Independents, 1 vacant.

November 29, 2010 - Mark Kirk sworn in to replace Roland Burris. 56 Democrats, 42 Republicans, 2 Independents.

Super-majority? It never existed because even during
two periods when Teddy Kennedy and/or Robert Byrd were unable to vote they still needed to get the votes of every Democrat plus BOTH independents.

FACT: The "Democrat Senate Super Majority" is a G.O.P. lie.

FACT: The GOP used every roadblock, filibuster, and secret hold they could think of so that EVERY bill had to have a 60-vote margin for closure.

Evidently when it comes to bringing facts to the table, Mikey can't be bothered to pull his head out of his Mom/Sister's lap long enough to site his sources.

After watching the rightwing pundit and congresswoman on Meet the Press last week who argued that it's a myth that women earn only 77 cents to a man's dollar, one realizes the problem runs MUCH deeper than just being ignorant of facts -- They are DELUSIONAL! They REALLY believe it is not them, the Teapublicans who are waging a War on Women -- In fact, GOP/TP Projection Politics (taking a page from Rove's playbook) is so rampant they claim it is President Obama who is waging war on women. Infreakincredible!

The first order of business may be to end the filibuster, but reinstating the Fairness Doctrine needs be done ASAP. The propaganda brainwashing on FOX Noise, Hate Radio, etc. is destroying our country!

True Patriot, I don't know if I'm ready to go as far as the Fairness Doctrine yet, but I do think there should be legal sanctions for passing off verified falsehoods and out-and-out lies as "news"...a practice Fox News has gone to court to protect.

As far as little Mikey's whining about the blue dress, he's right about one thing...no one cares. No one cared then, either, except radical Republicans determined to take down the duly elected President of these United States. The guardians of "fiscal responsibility" spent $200M to prove that a married man will lie about having an affair involving consensual sexual contact.

The GOP could have figured that out just by surveying their own caucus.

Gibson, regardless of whether the video is shown on a liberal or conservative site, the point is the video exists and it shows a religious leader telling you to beat your children.

Mickey, NY -- Forget about Michael1969's goatee, he has his mullet in a ponytail, and I'm tellin' ya there's a trailer park behind that tree where he lives.

RedDevPS -- How about immoral versus illegal? WTF is David Vitter still doing in office?

Because, like Michelle Bachman, their husband hasn't told them to think for themselves.

How can they not?

Sorry but I dont need a bill to tell me I have a human right to not be beaten or that my children have that right!!! People are under the impression that removing the bill would increase crimes against women and I do not understand why so many feel the need to have a law to protect them when they can have a gun instead!!! Oh I am so Texan at this moment!!

I know women in abusive situations and I know some would fight back regardless of some law and some won't fight back even with the law. We will always have both!! Next thing you know men will need a law to protect them from women, we are after all a different person everyday!!!

TexasFighterGirl, as another Texan, I'm appalled at the concept of NOT having a law to back me up when I shoot my husband for laying an abusive hand on me.

It is true, women in abusive situations will fight back regardless of laws. The point is that those who fight back, and those who are too scared to fight back as well, have the ADDITION of the law on their side! Isn't the law supposed to fight FOR you, not remain impartial and let you do the fighting yourself? It doesn't take a genius to figure out that VAWA is something beneficial for women.

I, personally, am glad we have laws defining other crimes. I fail to see how adding laws against violence against women can in any way be detrimental at the end of the day. Yes, we all have our own inherent human laws. Those unfortunately don't do us much good in a court of law. And while I would say, I wish these laws would include violence against men, I also have to say one step at a time. It is sad but true that when we start biting off more than we can chew, nothing gets passed, nothing changes, save maybe in a devolving way. I'd rather take on step forward and then another than have no progress at all.

If both sexes were entirely equal, I would say this is all a moot point. Do the research, and I don't mean just googling "gender equality." We're not equal, and at this point yeah, we do still need a "special" law because that is the only way we see fair treatment under it. Maybe in twenty years things will improve, and it will no longer be necessary. At this point in our history though, it is sadly still VERY necessary.

Gradual change and evolution are our allies, not force!!! When you take something by force, you are resented. So we agree in part of that.

I believe more in a blanket law for all humankind, such as no torture, no rape, no assault, etc, shall be done to any living human being or any gender, ethnicity, religion, or sexual choice, etc. Employment laws as well should be combined to only specify the BEST candidate for the job and not make any gender, ethnicity, age, etc an issue. I once worked for a boss who hired an African american over a white for the plain and simple reason, "we have to have more blacks on our payroll or we can get sued." I worked at a mechanics for a year and when they hired me they told me straight out they had to have a woman on the payroll or they could get sued. So over all the more qualified men that might have had families, I was hired bc I AM A GIRL>>>>???? WTF?? I dont want to be hired just bc some law says you need a different gender employee, I want to hired bc I am the best candidate. Though I did find out later I was the best qualified even out of the men and they didnt even now it when they hired me, but the reasoning for the initial hiring was stated as it was the fact I was a female. Why was that even brought up you ask? Bc someone just had to have a darn law stating they needed a woman in the employ, racial, gender and age diversity. Not always qualifications!!!

But perhaps your right, I am just sick of being treated special but not treated special. I know in many of my jobs the men made more money and I know it was unfair, but I also know I asked to be off more for my kids and my husband got denied by his boss when he asked to take off instead. I would turn our attention to the need for men to start deserving some equality.

I just do not like the bickering over laws and the time it waste getting back to our really big problems!! Whats the point of gender equality when there are no jobs to fight over!!!

I don't want to be 'special' anymore. I just want to be a normal human being and I want to treat other people like normal human beings. hetero, homo, still normal, one has been around just as long as the other, still normal. Man, woman, still normal human beings. I am sick of the lines.

And to be frank, I do know more men in abusive relationships than women and not a single one has ever reported the abuse, so while abuse statistics are out there, I know they are not accurate. A woman normally has more guts to stop abuse on her or her children than a man does. I once talked to a guy for a year who had an abusive spouse and he laughed anytime I mentioned getting help, said no one would believe it! (Paraphrased)

I have done the research and worked in the clinics and call centers. But I also worked in a clinic just for depression and suicide, and boy the calls from men were tough, they refused to listen or accept they needed help, but then they would beg for an easy solution, like it was some magic pill I could send over the phone. However my cases were handed to me for my ability to talk to men, I come from a large family 7 brothers and no sisters, so men were easier than women to talk to, mostly. But I have seen both sides of the coin having an abusive father!!! We had lots of rules that applied only to me and not the boys and the rules were always bc I was the weakest even when I wasnt, rules were rules and to this day my brothers refuse to see I am not a weakling, even though I have held my own in most fights with them, they were taught I was the weakest and had to be pandered to!!!

The Help line for depression and suicide, was often used instead of our abuse lines. It was easier to admit anything but abuse for a man, so thats why I talked to many of the abused males!!! And not all had female partners who abused them!!!

Just clarifying how I came to talk to abuse victims on a suicide line!!! On a funny note, I had a very very young kid call on accident one time and he kept me talking on the phone for 45 minutes, I wasn't allowed to hang up on the off chance it was SOMETHING, so he kept talking about cute little things, he named his cars, he read me a book, sang to me, etc. I must have asked 50 times to go get mommy and all he did was say mommy phone, she would laugh and say are you still playing phone, you are so funny or is it grandma.....THE PHONE IS ON PEOPLE.....luckily it was a very slow night and I didnt have to miss any calls. Finally his mom comes into the room and says " bed time"....'okay night night', CLICK!!!!! (still giving the short edited version) I would have loved to have seen his moms face when he hit the end button on the phone!!!! Yeah toll free!!!!

If you read half of the bills repubs vote down that were written by demos, you would see alot of things not mentioned by the media as reasons repubs voted it down. A bill to fund medicaid could include a rider to give $3million to Iran to build school, repubs being what they are feel this is unnecessary and wasteful at this time and will vote 'no'!!! That junk happens all the time and I am sick of it!!

Same sex partners and undocumented residents don't deserve the same legal protection as others?

You're not keeping your bigotry hidden very well.

John B, Same old left talking points that say only the federal government can take care of everyone's needs. Show me where same sex partners and undocumented residents don't have the same legal protection as others when it comes to enforcing criminal laws? Show me why the laws currently on the books in all the states do not protect everyone.

You say that same sex partners and undocumented residents have the same legal rights as others, but you're against that principle being stated in law...that's a contradiction, is it not?

"bill to fund medicaid could include a rider to give $3million to Iran to build school, repubs being what they are feel this is unnecessary and wasteful at this time and will vote 'no'!!! That junk happens all the time and I am sick of it!!"

Okay. Point to the specific medicaid rider that will give $3 million to Iran. My guess is you will not be able to point to anything but a right wing blog that makes this claim. And you won't really care if it is the truth or not if proven wrong. It won't disturb you that you are making opinions about policy with absolutely incorrect facts. You will continue to read or listen to the source of these "facts," because it is what you want to hear and believe.

It is so funny how all of these right wingers convince people like you that you will somehow become more self sufficient and more successful, the less rights your have and the more that is taken from you in the form of benefits. Go, be successful, just borrow the money from your parents. So schools aren't really full of the brightest people as much as they are full of the people whose parents had money. And don't worry, you are going to become so self sufficient, that if you cannot borrow money from your family to go to school, that it will all work out for you. There will become a way simply because the government has taken the major one away.

If we get rid of medicare and medicare, that is okay too because people are not going to get sick in the future, and if they do, the police are going to come throw them out of the emergency room that they will invariably flock to as they do now. Just cut funding and the problem is solved. Right? So lets move to the next step. Where are we going to park these sick and old people after the police remove them from the emergency room where they are demanding care? Where do we park them until they can die and stop screaming, which will only bother you.

Chris-Seattle .... It was an EXAMPLE!!!! How dare you assume that I was stating fact and used it for your own need to spew hatred and nasty remarks. It is a fact that Riders are attached to bills and are more often than not used as bribe to vote yes in order to get the rider passed or vice versa. The point being Chris, is that there should be no riders and no Hidden agenda on any bill and by ADDING to a bill up for re-vote and making it difficult to pass once re-written, YOU ADD TO THE PROBLEM!!!

You don't simplify a problem when you add riders you create political tangles for political gain!!!!

I would stop assuming if I were you and maybe go back to school and re-take government to learn the definition and use of riders!!!

Tell you what Chris, prove that demos did not 'add' anything to this bill up for renewal, that is not a serious republican issue and I will apologize!!! Prove the bill up for renewal is the SAME original bill passed and I will take back my statements!!!!

We don't need special laws, I agree. If we had special laws for every special group, and special departments to enforce those laws the government would be more of a gargantuan mess than it already is.

We do, however, I believe, need special programs for violence against women. Domestic violence is complex and scary. Besides the physical abuse, its psychological which makes it hard for battered women to escape. They do need the help some services provide.

So clean it up, pass the bill and take care of the women the Democrats claim they care about.

Amen, clean it up, help those that need help and are willing to get it!! Too many will not EVEN with the laws!!! Too many will not press charges!!! But to be honest I kinda know some men who need help getting out of bad situations!! We think its comical but its really scary, you just don't expect it!!! Kids are in the same boat as dad and men are programmed to think they should never be weak or admit weakness to anyone!! Men have it tough, women however are seen as a heros when they admit and defend themselves. People look at a man abused and say he is a pansy!! very double standard!!! abuse is not gender specific!!

Let me explain the flaw in your logic. Prior to the women's movement, most state laws treated women as chattel of the husband. Now I understand that are all tough, and would get your get Hilda, and distribute some personal justice. But realize that when you are chattel belonging to your husband under state law, you would go to prison for shooting him.

You talk about these women that won't call the police, but you seem to forget that in the absence of federal law, states are free to put as much or as little effort as they want in preventing domestic violence. And there were still quite a few states lagging behind on the concept of local police even protecting women. You fail to understand that laws are not applied equally, as they are in your perfect world when there is an implicit "understanding" between the police, judges, and local politicians that there is a justification for thumping on your wife. You can call it "freedom of culture" and say the federal government should not even be dictating what is enforced on a local level, but then what about the rights of women to be protected by their police force?

You in essence always had the right to get a gun as you stated and kill your husband is I guess what you are implying. But recognize that the state laws didn't always recognize a right to self defense when you were taking a beating from your husband. So you would get to go to prison for a long time, which would ruin your life.

The biggest problem with people that make blanket statements about how government shouldn't ever get involved have no idea how this country would look for minorities and women in the absence of federal law. You could buy as many guns as you wanted, although I am sure the gun seller would want to clear it with the Mr. No problem there. Right.

You refrained from the point, who will we need laws protecting next!!! just how many more laws do you need on the books? 10,000, 100,000, 1,000,000...when does it stop, huh? When do you finally say I really dont need a law protecting me from putting a sock on the wrong foot!!!

Sure you just keep voting for more more more, more laws, more regulation and just keep waiting for the day the laws says you 'have to buy this car, you have to buy this type of food, you may not correct your children." I would say you will be sorry but it wont be you, it will be your children and your great grand children who will pay the price for your need to be regulated and 'protected.'

Women fought for their rights BEFORE they were GIVEN any by the govt and being 'given' those rights only made us less equal bc someone actually had to write our rights down so nobody would confuse our rights with a mans rights. We have to be so special to have ours SPELLED OUT? Thanks, thank you so much for supporting the idea that we still have to be TOLD by a man in power what our rights are!!!

You merely give up one 'owner' for another!!! So now my husband can not tell me what to do but the govt can keep regulating everything about me and my body!! Thank you for supporting their position that I still do not have a mans sense or a mans rights without their permission!!!

You know why I make blanket statements about such things, bc I do not separate my rights from anybody elses and that includes my husbands right!!! If I beat the heck out of him tomorrow, he should have a law protecting him, a man, from me, a woman, and I guess without a blanket law he would need his own special "Man protection law." And how many millions of dollars will that cost me to pass?

People do not even consider the cost of nit pick laws!!

Thank you for supporting the acts and bills which continue to make my gender an issue and my gender the weaker for having NEEDED a bill!!!

I feel that way whenever we talk about a new middle eastern country we need to invade for "safety." Because military spending is not even a cost at all. It is little armament elves working away building $50 million tanks for free. Right?

And for being about less government, you sure support a guy whose platform calls for major interference of the medical relationship between a private individual and their doctor. And lets face it, you and I know what it is about, and it isn't about the person being "informed." It is putting obstacle after obstacle in the way of a medical procedure.

Republicans. They care about babies until they are born, then they are on their own. They care about soldiers until they are veterans. And they care about firemen any time they can get a photo op with one right before they declare people like them to be the problem. Now everyone is the enemy. Remember the old Sesame Street song "Who are the people in your neighborhood?" Kind of the heroes of yesteryear. The mailman, the teacher, the policeman, the fireman. Funny how these people are all the enemies of our society with secret plans to destroy it with unions now.

Republicans love America. They just hate most Americans.