Rand Returns Fire: Dems Have Left Party Over ‘Extreme’ Abortion Stance

[William Tell]

Rand Returns Fire: Dems Have Left Party Over ‘Extreme’ Abortion Stancehttp://cdn01.dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/468803164_opt-e1428437186684.jpg
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul says Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s recent comments on abortion should be interpreted to mean Democrats support the “third-trimester abortions of seven, eight, nine-pound babies.”


In an wide-ranging interview with The Daily Caller, the Republican presidential candidate predicted that Wasserman Schultz’s “extreme position” on abortion could cause people to flee the Democratic Party.


“It sounds like she has said that it’s a private decision, whether it’s a 7-pound baby, a 8-pound baby or 9-pound baby,” Paul told TheDC when asked about his recent back-and-forth with the Democrat on the issue. “And so yeah, I think that’s alarming.”


“I know a lot of people who aren’t necessarily pro-life who have mixed feelings on these issues,” he said. “They might even be pro-choice. But not many of them I know are big fans of third trimester abortions of seven, eight, nine-pound babies.”


On Wednesday, Wasserman Schultz responded to Paul’s comments on abortion by saying: “I support letting women and their doctors make this decision without government getting involved. Period. End of story.”





Continue:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/09/rand-returns-fire-dems-have-left-party-over-extreme-abortion-stance/?advD=1248,657765

[georgiaboy]

Carry on, Randal. Flip that narrative.

Wasserman Schultz and the DNC have stepped in it, and that stuff stinks and stains.

[thoughtomator]

I have to admit I was surprised at how much traction Rand has been getting on this - it's working out pretty well.

[jbauer]

This is political trolling at its best. I am liitterly laughing out loud.

[orenbus]

The best part about this is if it has legs and coverage, especially on conservative media, there is going to be a huge rally towards Rand. What better enemy short of Hillary could a Republican candidate for the nomination have (at this point in the cycle) than to start sparing with the head of the DNC? Hope this keeps going. :)

[idiom]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

[thoughtomator]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

Her position is driven by a eugenics agenda, it has nothing to do with liberty.

[tod evans]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

Not being a libertarian myself I could be mistaken but I fail to see how aborting babies unilaterally could be construed as libertarian, how 'bout an explanation?

[jbauer]

Some libritarians don't belive in life libert and the pursuit of happiness for babies.

[Spikender]

Some librarians told me to be quiet when I started talking in the library.

[osan]

Carry on, Randal. Flip that narrative.

Wasserman Schultz and the DNC have stepped in it, and that stuff stinks and stains.

He blew it. He ought to have cornered Schultz more tightly. Now she can backpedal her way to safety, most likely. I will, however, be gratified if shown wrong.

Now, I suspect many here would cheer at seeing hordes of Dems fleeing the ranks of the party, but ask yourself what that would really mean. If they go Rep, that gives the established order of that party pretext for believing they have a mandate. The least awful result would be if the Dems go Ind., methinks. But then what? What would a mass exodus really mean in practical terms? Anyone?

[osan]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

Care to demonstrate how aborting a fetus 1 day from coming of its nature into this world is "libertarian"? What is your fundamental premise in support of your assertion?

[FriedChicken]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

I don't know idiom's view on the topic.
But the way I read this is a mock media headline - many in the LP, like Gary Johnson, consider being pro-choice to be mandatory for being libertarian.
And the media always puts "libertarian lawmaker" in front of names when they want people to read "ineluctable" or "unrealistic".

So the DNC chair saying that you should be allowed to abort a baby on the day it would normally be born should brand her as "hardcore libertarian" in the eyes of the media and discredit her.

How'd I do?

[65fastback2+2]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

no.

she made it SOUND libertarian with her quip of "keep the government out of it"...but murder is not a libertarian principle.

[Spikender]

It's not?

I need to rethink my membership in the libertarian club.

[Sola_Fide]

DNC chair takes hardcore libertarian position. Rand drives media bus over her flaming corpse.

You cant be serious. If hardcore libertarians say it is a-ok for a doctor to crush the skull and vacuum suck out the brains of an innocent baby that would otherwise be born an hour later, then they can all go to hell. That's not "freedom". That's agression. That's eugenics.

[Tywysog Cymru]

I think Jimmy Carter also warned the Democrats that their position on abortion could alienate voters.

[Brett85]

Not to mention that Wasserman Schultz even voted against allowing the states to legalize hemp. So she thinks that people should have the freedom to murder babies but shouldn't have the freedom to grow a crop that can't even make you high.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Does everybody here know what a "partial birth abortion" is? Basically it's aborting a late trimester baby that would be medically able to survive outside the womb.

If the baby is outside the womb, the doctors would be legally obligated to save it's life, and it would survive. However just because this baby happens to be inside the womb, it's fair game. So instead of cutting the umbilical cord and pulling out the baby, they kill the baby in the womb, and then pull out the lifeless body. They do this by inserting a vacuum hose into the baby's head and sucking out it's brains, so the head collapses. The woman wants to keep her figure after all, so that she can still be sexually attractive. Crushing the babies head makes it so that she is stretched much less.

I mean, think about this. If this baby were outside the womb, it would survive, and doctors would be legally obligated to save it. But just because it happens to be located in the womb, we are allowed to suck out it's brain with a vacuum hose and dump the body in the garbage can? This does not make sense, it's sick and disgusting. I can't believe anybody, even a libertarian, could support this kind of thing.

Ron Paul was an obstetrician, he is closer to this topic than any of us. Can we not trust his judgement and take his word on this subject?

[Liberty74]

And this is why I LOVE Rand. Rand has no problem throwing their crap back into their faces unlike most Republicans who are constantly taking jabs and knock outs.

Who's getting Randalized this week? LOL