Here's a fundraising e-mail, subject line "Telling it like it is," from Tom Barrett's wife, Kris:
Dear Friend,
In order to protect a woman's right to basic health services in Wisconsin, we need to have a governor who stands up for us.
Wisconsinites support a woman's right to health services and family planning because it is a fundamental value. Unlike Scott Walker, my husband firmly believes that personal, private health care decisions are best made by women, families, and doctors -- not the government.
In contrast, Scott Walker not only wants to roll back a woman’s right to choose, but he also wants to implement radical policies that threaten women's health.
On the campaign trail, Scott Walker has stated that he wants to make it more difficult for Wisconsinites to qualify for BadgerCare. A crucial program within BadgerCare has saved Wisconsin taxpayers $139.1 million while providing over 65,000 Wisconsinites with access to Pap smears, testing for sexually transmitted diseases, and birth control. This program has proved to be both good for women and good for our state's fiscal health, but Scott Walker wants to restrict access to it.
As governor, Tom will stand with Wisconsin's women to ensure that they continue to have access to affordable, quality health care.
Make a donation now to the Women for Barrett Action Fund, which is dedicated to turning out women to vote from across our state.
Scott Walker even wants to allow pharmacists to deny women access to birth control, restrict sex education, and outlaw abortion across the board -- even in cases of rape and incest, or if a woman's life is in danger.
Walker's running mate, Rebecca Kleefisch, is just as extreme. In response to Sharron Angle's statement that child victims of rape and incest should view their resulting pregnancies as an opportunity to turn lemons into lemonade, Kleefisch praised Angle on Facebook for "telling it like it is."
Well I'm going to tell it like it is: Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch are simply too far out of the mainstream for Wisconsin.
Your contribution of $5, $15, $25, or $50 will help us expose the truth about Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch's radical beliefs, and make sure Wisconsin women get out to vote.
The difference is clear: Tom Barrett will stand up to protect fundamental health services for Wisconsin's women. Scott Walker won't.
Thank you for your support,
Kris Barrett
Who is the extremist here?
Let's "tell it like it is."
Barrett's record in office shows that he is rabidly pro-abortion.
Read details of Barrett's extremism here and here.
This statement by Kris Barrett is stunning:
Unlike Scott Walker, my husband firmly believes that personal, private health care decisions are best made by women, families, and doctors -- not the government.
What?
Is Barrett opposed to ObamaCare?
He must be if Kris claims that Tom is against the government being involved in making health care decisions.
Is it radical to oppose the barbaric procedure of partial-birth abortion?
I think it's unconscionable to be in favor of that grisly act. Tom Barrett voted AGAINST the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2002.
Yet we're supposed to buy that Scott Walker and Rebecca Kleefisch are the radicals?
Sorry. That's simply not true.
Are Kris and Tom Barrett Catholic?
I think they are.
How do they reconcile their extremist views with the Catholic Church's position regarding the sanctity of life?
Must be tough.
Bottom line: Like his liberal Democrat comrades, Barrett is staunchly pro-abortion.
Barrett supports big government determining our health care choices, making life and death decisions.
Slaughtering the unborn is not health care, Tom.
5 comments:
In all my lefty, pinko, socialist, fascist, progressive, communist get-togethers, I've never met a single person who is "pro-abortion," let alone one that was rabidly so. We all wish it were non-existent, but being realists, prefer it to be rare.
Unfortunately, the same people who would like to see it outlawed in all instances, also make it difficult for us to make it so, rare that is, as they view contraceptives as equally evil, and prefer sex education to be abstinence only. We'd be happy to work with the other side to strive for zero unwanted pregnancies, but that possibility is nil from the get go, and not by our choosing.
By the way, what would a person be like who was truly pro-abortion: "Wow, I haven't had a abortion in a while. Think I'll get pregnant so I can go in for a good ol' D&E."
I use the terms "pro-abortion" and "anti-abortion."
I don't like the wordplay of sugarcoating abortion with the term "pro-choice."
But, as I stated, many people who call themselves pro-choice would also consider themselves anti-abortion in their personal lives, but prefer not to impose their beliefs upon people in situations we could never understand. I count myself in that group.
As for names for groups, I generally stick with calling people what they prefer to be called themselves, so I go with pro-choice and pro-life, but anti-abortion works for me too.
If you agree with Tom Barrett and Russ Feingold and Obama, then you are pro-abortion. You also support partial-birth abortion.
Their own campaign literature touts that they staunchly defend a woman's right to kill her unborn baby. Of course, that's not the way they describe their position. Why? Because it's so horrible.
Let's not play with words. Saying you're against abortions, but you're cool with abortion on demand, is ridiculous. It's a game.
Soothe your conscience by saying you want abortion to be rare. That doesn't help the "unlucky" ones whose mothers didn't allow them to be born.
You're "pro-choice" when it comes to the more than 1 million human lives aborted in the U.S. yearly, but you're against abortion.
Sure.
OK, Mary.
Post a Comment