Top 15 Ways Ryan Republican Budget Harms Women And Their Families

[personal attack deleted]

 

This article is misleading (surprise!). The Ryan budget would not do these things to "Women and their families" directly, but the repeal of ObamaCare would affect those things in the first section. Now, if that was all that was accomplished, repealing ObamaCare, yes, these sort of things would happen. But the Republicans have a replacement plan for ObamaCare that retains the best features, like the 'no denial of insurance based on pre-existing conditions' (among others) that would make this entire article moot.

 

I agree! Men should be charge for gynecological coverage, too!

And that's bad...why?

Under what plan?

How so?

Of those women, how many of them are teenagers or young adults?

You realize that the reason women make less is two fold: First, because women tend to take less dangerous and less skilled jobs and, second, because women have babies, right?

Good. The federal government has no authority and no responsibility to be involved in food stamp programs.

How's that feminism workin' out for you?

Great. The Constitution never gives the government the authority or responsibility to be involved in such programs.

How does it "punish women seniors"?

I'd like to see your source for this because it's been my experience that, any time the Looney Left trots out the whole "tax breaks for millionaires" line, they're lying through their teeth and the tax breaks extend to those who are not millionaires.

I'd also be curious to know why you believe millionaires are less entitled to the money they've earned than anyone else.

Source?

I see. So, your complaint is that they would have to pay more for free healthcare?

Great. Let's replace it with a free market healthcare system that would drive down costs, increase availability, and encourage innovation.

I see. So, your complaint is that they would have to switch to another charity?

How so?

Er, you realize that one of the reasons college tuition is so high to begin with is because of endless government grants and loans, right?

Second, where is it written that they must go to college? And where is it written that we should pay for it.

Yeah, how dare the federal government pay less for something the Constitution says they have no business being involved in in the first place!

Where in the Constitution does it say that the federal government should be paying for these things in the first place?

Your argument isn't with the Republicans, comrade. It's with the Constitution.

 

Every now and then when I look at how much just ridiculous wealth is wrapped up in the church that we aren't using to help the poor, the widowed and the orphaned, I find myself not caring that the government is taking it from us to take care of somebody else.

If Ryan's plan takes all this stuff away, will the church step in to help those who are in need?

The Catholic Church is ridiculous. I would imagine if you took all the holdings of Protestant churches together, they would be just as ridiculous.

 

Imagining it's so sure helps you stay on that high horse, don't it ?

 

The Gavel Dot Gov is Nancy Pelosi's site. I noticed they're not allowing comments on this piece of garbage. I expect this kind of dishonesty from her.

 

My high horse stands just high enough not to smell the putrid vile that comes out of your mouth.:thumbs:

 

I think it's more like your own keyboard. :thumbs: Back atcha. You can imagine I care what you think.

But I think "vile" is a descriptive word, and doesn't really work in that statement. (Not sure if it's an adverb or an adjective, and would suppose it can be used as either.)

You probably meant "bile'.

 

See, I knew that you knew what that rancidity was coming out of your mouth.

 

Nope. Just correcting you. Like I said, I don't care what you think of me, Zaac. If you think it's vile, or bile, so be it. I'm sure you don't care what a self-pious arse I think you are.