.

Brown-Warren: Do You Believe There's a War on Women?

Trailing in the latest polls, Elizabeth Warren charged Scott Brown is part of a Republican war on women. Do you agree, or is this just a stunt?

Senator Scott Brown has opened up a lead over challenger Elizabeth Warren in a new poll released Tuesday. Public Policy Polling has Brown over Warren by five points. 

On the stump, however, Warren's on the offensive, saying Brown and the Republican party are waging a war on women. She's pointed to comments by Missouri Senate hopeful Todd Akin as the latest evidence of that war. Akin has been roundly condemned by liberals and conservatives alike for his statement that it's rare for women to become pregnant after a "legitimate rape." Akin has apologized and attempted to clarify his statement, saying he meant "forcible rape."

Brown has publicly called on Akin to drop out of the race, and asked that the Republican party soften its stance on abortion

What do you think? Is Warren right about Republicans trying to claw back women's rights? Did Brown call for Akin's withdrawal to blunt these attacks? Or are Warren's claims about a war on women just the smoke and mirrors of a losing campaign? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

Leeroy August 28, 2012 at 08:17 PM
What an articulate argument.
Alan Leo August 28, 2012 at 09:33 PM
Here's the record: Scott Brown voted against equal pay for women. He voted for the Blunt amendment to limit women's access to birth control and cancer screenings. And he voted to filibuster pro-choice judicial nominees. The Republican war on women is fought on many fronts. There are the misogynists like Todd Akin, who want to make women second class citizens under the law. Then there are the enablers like Scott Brown and Mitt Romney, who treat women's rights as nice in theory, like the pursuit of happiness, but not real rights to be enforced by law. Not like the rights of a corporation.
Mark August 28, 2012 at 10:24 PM
Good try Alan. You must be just another tolerant liberal spewing your divisive hate like your radical racist leader in the White House. The only "War" is the war on our wallets. The Blunt Amendment would have allowed not only religious groups but any employer with moral objections to opt out of the coverage requirement. In other words if they disagreed with using their tax dollars for abortions or contraception, due to their religious belief, you and the Nazi in the White House would use force to make them comply. How tolerant. All the while, giving special interest groups loyal to the radical racist "Waivers". You want to pay for abortions or contraception knock yourself out. But keep your sticky fingers out of my wallet.
Alan Leo August 29, 2012 at 10:56 AM
Mark, three things: 1. Thanks for showing folks where Scott Brown's support comes from. 2. The Blunt amendment imagined a "right to deny rights." But fortunately for all of us, rights don't work like that; employers don't get to morally opt out of workplace safety laws, either. 3. Google "Godwin's law."
Clint August 31, 2012 at 06:39 PM
What a bunch of minions. They must think women are stupid and will eat up any phoney tales they tell. The Republicans hate cotton candy too and will have that abolished asap.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »