The last time Mitt Romney's campaign ran into real trouble on contraception, it dispatched South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) to argue, "Women don't care about contraception.... The media wants to talk about contraception."
Republican policymakers were, at the time, pushing legislation -- at the state and federal level -- to restrict access to birth control, but for Romney surrogates, the sensible response was to say contraception doesn't matter.
Today, it happened again.
Kerry Healey, Romney's lieutenant governor in Massachusetts, fresh off her borderline-comical turn in the post-debate spin room last night, sat down with MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell today, and the host asked questions Healey presumably expected, noting Romney's support for the Blunt Amendment, for example.
Inexplicably, the Romney surrogate described the consequences of the candidate's own proposals as "some hypothetical situation." Healey added that even having a discussion about women being able to afford contraception is a "peripheral" issue.
This arrogant attitude is extraordinary. Under Romney's preferred agenda, employers can end contraception coverage for their women employees, and millions of Americans would no longer be able to afford birth control.
Asked to defend this right-wing nonsense, the Romney campaign's defense is that the question is irrelevant -- as if the issue is so trivial, it's not even worth their time.
If this is Team Romney's attempt to appear in touch with the needs of working families, it's likely to backfire.
Postscript: On a related note, Ed Gillespie said he was "wrong" last night to explain that Romney opposed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. For those keeping score at home, the Romney campaign, over the course of less than a day, has had no position on the law, been opposed to the law, and then supportive of the law.
Leave a Comment:
Birth control does not mean ...having no children....or doing away with babies....it means spacing your children to fit budgets, lifestyle, number of children in family that is affordable at the time...but can be changed as times change.
Birth control means less unmarried moms....and less unwanted children who are not cared for.
Birth control means preserving the intimacy of married sex, as well as single persons who are not ready for even a first child.
Birth control can pereserve a marriage by not adding more burdens than the couple can deal with in terms of child care, and working.
Birth control saves a couple from stress, anger,possible violence, and divorces.
Birth control is a tool for population control.
Birth control is designed to do many things.
Gating/prohibiting women's access to oral contraceptives is part of the Conservative Jobs Plan (for men).
Uh does this mean the Trojan war is lost? See you at the polls Ms. America!
Women secretly terrify certain men, so those men need to exert control over that which they fear. They are the scary ones.
Is it hard to look down your nose at people while at the same time keeping that nose up in the air? Can one actually stick his nose into everyones bedroom and yet pretend to be above all of them?
Steve Benen- CORRECTION (to your update): I know it's late so you may not see this, but didn't Gillespie say that Romney had no position on Lilly Ledbetter? He said that Romney wouldn't seek to repeal it, but that "he never weighed in on it at the time."
"You People just don't understand the real issues."
I really can't be bothered with Nikki Haley's stupidity. "Women don't care about contraception.... The media wants to talk about contraception."
I just want these people to stop poisoning the airwaves.
Since when did women become A-sexual? It takes two to tango you stupid Republicans.
Informed women are outraged about the endless intrusion and legislative attacks on women's privacy and reproductive rights. I would ask a similar question: Since many couples count on female oral contraception as a reliable form of birth control and family planning, why are men staying so silent? This is also an economic issue.... they should share this outrage. should be equally outraged. Against abortion, against Planned Parenthood, against equal pay AND "welfare babies," and now against birth control? How does the GOP repeatedly get away with breaking their own campaign planks against the backs of women and families? Perhaps if all women carried guns...? Seriously, they wouldn't dream of alienating 47% of the NRA demographic.
You are so right. The Republicans wouldn't think of saying anything to alienate the NRA. But women oh well they certainly don't care about them or their needs or alienating them. Despicable!!
Lois,
Do you hate men or do you hate politics? It appears to be one or the other.
I can't speak for Lois, but I will answer before you ask me the same thing.
I detest republican men and also republican women. All republicans jump on the band-wagon, of greed, corruption, un-patriotic, and radical extremism. They are a very bad example for our young people and do not deserve to live in America or call themselves American
Thank you Rachel for speaking out on birth control tonight. It is so important that women have reproductive rights and can continue to make decisions about their own bodies and lives. I think Obama did a good job of calling Romney out on some of his lies and mistruths and I think that was important for the American people to hear. The Romney\Bush comparison question from that lady was really great too. I kind of consider that one of Obama's slam dunks. :)
Nicholas the 2nd of Russia was said to take the opinion of the last person he spoke to. Sound familiar? only mitt takes the form of whoever he's speaking too. Nicholas 2 was the last Tsar of Russia. He, and his entire family, we're slaughtered in a dank basement, after he was forced to abdicate his throne, culminating in the Russian revolution and the end of over 300 years of Romanov rule. He was a good man, totally unsuited to the job that he inherited. And his answer to alot of the problems before all of this, was to say that old standby "thy will be done' He had chance after chance to let go of some of his power, and work with the russian imperial form of representative body called the duma. But he was schooled by his faith, and the traditional belief that he was anointed by god, and there fore could not share his god given right to rule. It was his Obligation to carry out god's will. Mitt romney is all the sides he's taken, plus the vessel for the oil, those brothers, and he will follow orders, change positions, change any forward moving things like roe v wade, and anything to do with women in an age he's completely clueless about. Somebody, whose spine is gummy, is a dangerous person to have anywhere near our government. Like poor Nicholas, he's stumbled into a job for which he is totally unsuited. Every time he opens his mouth, wars could be started. Revolution could not be far behind. If were going to let go of the reins, be prepared for the fait that befell the imperial dynasty of russia. Only, mitt will be spared, the people left on the firing line. What possible reason, could make reasonable voters hesitate as clear as he makes it, he's Nicholas of this American century. Obama has rational ideas, and doesn't cow to his monied buddies. why then, are people bothering trying to make mitt into something misunderstood. We understand that he's just as close to tanking an empire, as the guy who destroyed 300 years of his family rule, and the entire social structure of his beloved Russia. Whats to say, this man who's to good to answer questions for the office he's running for, isn't going to be a dictator, or just like w, and embarrassing, war starting, chest pounding, but not capable of logical thought, just a frat boy blowing thru and screwing up everything he touched. When a party like the gop says that facts don't matter,start looking at whats behind the curtain. Obama is the man with the plan, nothing behind his back. Why, unless your a hater, of blacks, women, gays...ect. would you pick the guy too shady to share his plan. if you pick him just to spite Obama, were going to end up in a dank basement of our own. Besides, we cant afford another republican , until we clean up after the last one. i mean, Obama is. ps, Nicholas was a nice guy who loved his family, and that doesn't have anything to do with competence. Personally, mitts wife is a, cant spell, stepford wife, and its of no consequence that he can hold together a very 50's kind of family. unless you think... oh, i better shut up.2012, we could have a gay family in the White house. No, just a thought. history is just full of these wonderful antidotes. Russian in particular, ARE full of Hitchcock little moments. Just hope we're smart enough to leave your god in the parking lot, no good can be had counting on an invisible guy. so sorry about the length. I care.
Ok so Cialis is covered for men at these religious employers, but not birth control!?! That's extremely hypocritical! So you have a bunch of horny men running around and impregnating women but women are stymied from controlling those births. Let's face it for some reason they expect women to take a back seat to what really counts in this world.
Gives new meaning to the term "forced labor".
This "irrelevant" comment from Romney's campaign just infuriates me! Women and their concerns are irrelevant. AAARRRGGHH!
Wow. I am so very surprised that the general elecorate seems to be fixated upon reproduction issues once again.
Lulu...understand your thoughts....mainly, this is not going to be a big issue this fall (across the country). Keep up the faith.
Mike
Mike, do you, or do you not love your mother, wife, sister or daughter???
Only if they do as he says before he says it, if his women don't know what he wants before he does then they are lazy slackers. Funny how it was the republicans who ran on jobs jobs jobs yet once in office all they did was go after womens vagina's. Now it is the liberal media's fault that they reported on what the republicans were doing so it is liberal media's fault that the republicans were interested in womens vagina's, man talk about twisted.
This on-going, and largely undisguised, attack on women so upset me that I created my own campaign pin in response. It strikes me that the underlying assumptions, values, and attitudes expressed by the right wing through this rhetoric are no less than a dehumanizing slave mentality toward women and girls. Have a look at my pin if you're interested. It's at www.formydaughtersfuture.com. In this case, every woman, every girl child, is "daughter" to us all. Parenthood is not required.
www.formydaughtersfuture.com
Miss Maddow,
You are being EXTREMELY misleading. The Romney campaign, along with most people believes it is neither the government's job nor an employer's job to tell someone whether or not they can or cannot take contraceptives. It IS an employers job to determine whether they will directly fund contraceptives. They are not preventative care, unless you consider pregnancy a disease; in fact they produce many bad health effects for women. It IS NOT the government's job to FORCE American citizens AGAINST THEIR RELIGIOUS BELIEFS (whether or not you agree) to pay for contraceptives. There is a huge difference.
Mitt Romney: Government/employers have no right to dictate whether women can take contraceptives. This is correct
Employers DO have a right to choose not to fund a drug that specifically violates their moral beliefs.
Get your story straight and quit twisting the truth.
Actually, hormonal contraceptives are used in the treatment of conditions affecting the woman's reproductive system such as ovarian cysts which can be fatal and I know this because my doctor offered it as part of my treatment options.
Why don't you do your research and get your facts straight?
Oh I've done a lot of research. Hormonal contraceptives makes women experience mood swings, abnormal periods, and depression. Studies show that infertility makes them less attractive to men, less attracted to successful men, and more attracted to less successful men. Married couples who use hormonal contraceptives are more likely to divorce than those who don't. The pill is a huge injustice to women. I realize it has other health benefits, but there are also other alternatives to those health problems. I do know because I've used hormonal contraceptives (while abstinent) at the suggestion of my doctor for other health reasons. Guess what, there was another better medical treatment.
Many of these contraceptive pills are abortifacient. Usually their job is to prevent contraception, but when it fails to do that, it kills the human life that has begun to grow. Whether or not you believe that killing human life is wrong or whether you belief that life begins at conception (although its a scientific truth), people have a constitutional right to follow their conscience and the teachings of their church. Which Obamacare specifically violates. Whether you agree with the moral dilemma or not, you should believe in the Constitution.
"Studies?" Sources? "Science?"
Where are your sources? What "alternative methods" have you found? I suppose you're also going to tell me that it turns women gay next?
1. Birth control is not the only thing that causes those symptoms. Other things such as sports and stress contribute to those things.
2. What studies have proven that birth control has such a psychological effect? Who conducted them? What credibility do they have?
3. I will not discount your case but you are speaking as if doctors will refuse to use other treatments. It is a CHOICE, one that other women shouldn't be denied.
4. From what I've heard and read, Obamacare isn't forcing the pills down your throat and it certainly isn't forcing you to take that treatment option.
5. Is this the same church that is supposed to be separate and apart from federal and state dealings? Have you ever heard of separation of State and Church because it's one of the foundation principles of democracy.
6. I'm not from America the great. I'm from a small nation-state that recognises a number of contrasting religions and beliefs, which, I believe is also the case in the US or should be. Recognise, dear, that not all people share your beliefs and you shouldn't take away their choice or deny/regulate their means of making that choice a reality. That same church you speak of? It's also supposed to recognise everyone's free will.
Congress shall make no laws respecting the establishment of religion.
That part need pondering and if someone sites religious oppositions, they are overstepping their religious freedom into the establishment of religion into laws. We are never going to allow one church or religion tell us to observe their beliefs.
This is a never ending battle because some folks believe they CAN force their beliefs into laws. They get upset when the court says no, you can't do that. Well, the court's job is to determine if the laws are constitutionally sound.
Just look at the hysteria over "Sharia Law" in some places in the U.S.. Sharia Law is probably not Constitutional.