In the front lines of the Republican War on Women are the standard issues of abortion and birth control, and they serve two valuable purposes for the Republican Party. First they keep Republican Supply-side pseudo-Christians goose stepping without realizing that Republicans do not represent their well being. Second, they detract attention from what Republicans want to avoid: the economy. However the seamiest side of the Republican War on Women, the side that should provoke as much outrage as the standard issues, receives very little attention.
What Republican war on women? The Violence Against Women Act was reauthorized in 2005 by unanimous consent in the Senate and with 415 votes in favor in the House, and signed by George W. Bush. It’s up for reauthorization again now, and of course, this time, Republicans have a problem with it. The bill—which is actually cosponsored by Idaho Republican Sen. Mike Crapo—received no Republican votes in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Oh, they’ll tell you they want to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act … but of course, they want to do it their way. "The Republican opposition seems driven largely by an antigay, anti-immigrant agenda," a New York Times editorial explains:
The main sticking points seemed to be language in the bill to ensure that victims are not denied services because they are gay or transgender and a provision that would modestly expand the availability of special visas for undocumented immigrants who are victims of domestic violence — a necessary step to encourage those victims to come forward.
It’s not just that, though. Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, not only wants to eliminate those provisions, but has his own version of the bill that contains "a huge reduction in authorized financing, and elimination of the Justice Department office devoted to administering the law and coordinating the nation’s response to domestic violence and sexual assaults." Grassley’s funding cuts are above and beyond the $135 million reduction in funding from 2005 levels already contained in the bill the Judiciary Committee Republicans unanimously rejected… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Daily Kos>
Now, I’m not accusing Republicans of wanting to encourage violence against women. What makes this part of the Republican War on Women is that Republicans care so little about women’s safety that they want to gut the funding for it. Why? Every penny spent protecting a woman from violence is a penny Republicans cannot give to a billionaire.
18 Responses to “More from the Republican War on Women”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
What a bunch of flip-flopping toadies! It was good enough in 2005 for the Republican/Teabaggers, but not in 2012 with a $135 million budget reduction.
In October 2011, there was a ‘discussion’ between the City of Topeka, Kansas and the County — neither had the budgets to prosecute domestic violence cases so Topeka, in order to do away with the problem, decriminalised domestic violence, in other words made it legal.
http://www.care2.com/causes/topeka-may-make-domestic-violence.html
One week later, domestic battery was no longer a crime and 18-30 people were released from custody.
If there was any doubt that there was a War on Women, there shouldn’t be now. Women of all kinds, but especially minorities, low income, LGBT, and immigrants are being made the scapegoats of government. I won’t pin this solely on the Republicans since I don’t know the political allegiance of Topeka officials. But considering Kansas is a red state, and the furore over contraception and abortion currently in the spotlight is coming from the ultra rightwing-nuts in the Republican party, I think it is a safe bet that women can thank the Republican/Teabaggers for this problem.
And all this is before the renewal of the Violence Against Women Act with its $135 million budget cut. Now Grassley and his little minions want to cut the budget further in a drastic fashion, but he also wants the elimination of the Justice Department office devoted to administering the law and coordinating the nation’s response to domestic violence and sexual assaults.
Women are being seen as chattel by the Republican/Teabaggers, property with little value that can be used and discarded like yesterday’s newspaper.
Years ago, I was told by a ‘good Christian’ man that there was something wrong with me because at the age of about 27, I was not married and did not have children, nor did I want children. It is this same attitude that I am seeing 35 years later in the Republican/Teabagger party.
Ladies, get those pink boxing gloves out for the fight of your life. Now normally I wouldn’t say pink, but let them know as women, you won’t stand for any of their crap!
Thanks for the petition, Lynn. I short taked the situation in Kansas a while back.
The RepublicanT party is full of mysogynists!
A Misogynist is a person (often but not always a man) who hates women. Some psychoanalysts feel that it stems from the time when some men were boys and experienced a time earlier in their lives when they had a need to feel more masculine, and not so nurtured by their mothers as daughters do. It’s a more difficult time for some young men. All through life they seem to reach back to days of old where they are the hunters providing for their family while the wife bears children, cooks, cleans and does as she is told. Now a new world has opened up where women are far more liberated and it all started with the Women’s Rights for voting. Men felt women should stay and home and do their wifely duties. Then came WWII and men went off to war while women took over men’s jobs. Once those men who were lucky enough to come home from the war alive were given their jobs while women were told to go back yet again to their wifely duties, but this time women had a taste of the fact they were far more intelligent than lead to believe and that they could earn a living. From then on it was male chauvinism for years where women didn’t get the same pay for the same job (generally in offices.) Even today women that join Armed Forces, the Police Academy or the Fire Department can go through quite a difficult time. They are still not fully accepted on an equal basis by many men. A man’s character is very fragile although they don’t understand why. Most men accept the way things are in today’s world, but some men will go out of their way to make women’s lives miserable and he’ll enjoy doing it. Some of those ways are by murder, rape or domestic abuse. These men want the control back they feel they deserve. Spelled correctly, “misogyny” means a hatred of women A misogynist is a person full of hatred and dislike for women.
Thanks for the explanation, Patty.
How is this any more legal than Blaggo selling the Senate seat in Illinois??
Zada, did you intend this comment to be on the article about Fartfuhrer Walker?
GOP = Greedy Old Phucks
“Chuck Grassley, the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, not only wants to eliminate those provisions, but has his own version of the bill that contains “a huge reduction in authorized financing, and elimination of the Justice Department office devoted to administering the law and coordinating the nation’s response to domestic violence and sexual assaults.”
No funding, no office and no teeth…
Exactly!
Welcome Cora. 🙂
Amen to that!
I’ve heard anti-VAWA rhetoric from right-wingers before, but I mistakenly thought it was restricted to the fringe. When I learned about Republican failure to support its current incarnation, I realized that this was NOT a fringe position among right-wingers.
Seriously, how can you be opposed to VAWA, a bill that assists countless domestic violence and sexual assault programs nationwide? The right has become downright inhumane.
Hatred is what fuels their party.
Indeed, John.
Ahab, I thought the same. When they did this in Kansas… well… that’s Kansas. Now that it’s their baseline position in the US Senate, there is no doubt that you are right.
Please, please, back off the bold print! It’s hard on the eyes, and makes the article all but unreadable, and you’re using it for so much text that it becomes meaningless.
Thank you.
Welcome Wayne. I used it here far more than I usually do, but there was so much in the article that I wanted to emphasize, I made an exception. I’m so sorry I hurt your eyes, but if you think you can write a better blog that this, feel free.
The Klanservative Klanbagging Kochsuckers are a purified organization of hate. They only have hate, they only know hate, they only push hate.
And among their ranks, they have plenty of self-loathers. Like that disgusting right-wing (insert Ed Schultz description here) Laura Ingraham, that inbred anchor baby Michelle Malkin, and of course, Clarence “Uncle” Thomas.
If this was a “Springer” episode, people would be demanding that Jerry be driven off the air, such are the violations of decency.
You forgot the Coultergeist! 😉