gotsnowgotslush
skates like Eck
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2007
- Posts
- 25,720
How low would a Wingnut go ? How much ridicule borne, is too much ?
Is this why Wingnuts use disgusting images and words, to attack others who do not agree with their viewpoint ?
They would bear anything, including death, to prove their loyalty to their cult ?
See- Deranged Right Wing Extremist who mistakenly murders fellow cult members, or potential allies for his cause. Because he has deluded himself, into thinking that he is defending his beliefs.
Harmless snark, or a lawyer's move in a courtroom, that will bring less safety and less options for women dealing with dangerous pregnancies?
Idaho Republican Rep. Vito Barbieri would know-because he is a long-time lawyer with savvy, and a rabid pro God/god anti-abortion, Koch Republican.
He does not really believe that a woman could swallow a camera, and that the camera would somehow leave her digestive tract, and travel to her vagina.
He was willing to make himself appear to be that ridiculously uninformed, by asking that question.
Barbieri said, “She made the point that you could swallow a camera and from thousands of miles away, you could detect the state of that colonoscopy. … My question was then, are you saying that you can swallow a camera and get the same results? Which is of course rhetorical.
People attending the three hour hearing had burst out into laughter, because the idea was so incongruous, when connected with what is commonly known, and what anyone would expect from a lawyer, and an elected official.
Republican Rep. Vito Barbieri's explanation-
"So rather than be sarcastic, I’m just leading her down to get the answer that I want, which is that they (colon surgery by remote vs gynecological medication guided by telemedicine) don’t compare."
"She was drawing a parallel between a colonoscopy and how much more dangerous it was than a chemical abortion,” Barbieri told Eye on Boise. “So, I was trying to draw out the distinctions.”
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/boise/2015/feb/23/barbieri-it-was-rhetorical/
He is trying to convince uninformed people that the procedure is dangerous-
Telemedicine abortion has never been available in Idaho, but it was available in Iowa until the procedure was banned in 2014. In 2011, a study by Ibis Reproductive Health on the impact of the availability of telemedicine abortion in the state found that it was just as safe as abortions performed in the presence of a physician.
There is nothing to suggest that telemedicine abortion is dangerous, but that is the claim that Barbieri is making anyway.
http://www.salon.com/2015/02/24/law...ected_question_was_about_safety_of_the_woman/
Tuesday morning, the Idaho Legislature introduced its fourth bill of this legislative session that limits a woman’s right to an abortion.
This latest bill is a rewrite of a bill introduced last week that bans telemedicine, but only concerning women’s health.
According to Idaho Medical Association spokesman Ken McClure, the IMA approached the bill’s sponsor, Idaho Chooses Life Executive Director David Ripley, with the following message: “We can’t make this work in the real world.”
In an attempt to stop a train wreck, the IMA offered to help with the bill’s language to prevent it from endangering women’s healthcare more than it already did.
In other words, Idaho Chooses Life wanted to take away healthcare options for women, yet the bill was written so badly the group nearly blundered into taking away more rights from women than they intended.
(Did Republican women decide they could not support another anti-abortion bill, because Republican men did not notice how much harm they were doing Again ?
Here’s the bottom line: Idaho Chooses Life drafted a bill limiting women’s medical choices without consulting the Idaho Medical Association.
They say their bill is about women’s safety. If it was, you’d think they would have consulted with a doctor.
http://www.betteridaho.org/2015/02/idahos-war-women-update/
Is this why Wingnuts use disgusting images and words, to attack others who do not agree with their viewpoint ?
They would bear anything, including death, to prove their loyalty to their cult ?
See- Deranged Right Wing Extremist who mistakenly murders fellow cult members, or potential allies for his cause. Because he has deluded himself, into thinking that he is defending his beliefs.
Harmless snark, or a lawyer's move in a courtroom, that will bring less safety and less options for women dealing with dangerous pregnancies?
Idaho Republican Rep. Vito Barbieri would know-because he is a long-time lawyer with savvy, and a rabid pro God/god anti-abortion, Koch Republican.
He does not really believe that a woman could swallow a camera, and that the camera would somehow leave her digestive tract, and travel to her vagina.
He was willing to make himself appear to be that ridiculously uninformed, by asking that question.
Barbieri said, “She made the point that you could swallow a camera and from thousands of miles away, you could detect the state of that colonoscopy. … My question was then, are you saying that you can swallow a camera and get the same results? Which is of course rhetorical.
People attending the three hour hearing had burst out into laughter, because the idea was so incongruous, when connected with what is commonly known, and what anyone would expect from a lawyer, and an elected official.
Republican Rep. Vito Barbieri's explanation-
"So rather than be sarcastic, I’m just leading her down to get the answer that I want, which is that they (colon surgery by remote vs gynecological medication guided by telemedicine) don’t compare."
"She was drawing a parallel between a colonoscopy and how much more dangerous it was than a chemical abortion,” Barbieri told Eye on Boise. “So, I was trying to draw out the distinctions.”
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/boise/2015/feb/23/barbieri-it-was-rhetorical/
He is trying to convince uninformed people that the procedure is dangerous-
Telemedicine abortion has never been available in Idaho, but it was available in Iowa until the procedure was banned in 2014. In 2011, a study by Ibis Reproductive Health on the impact of the availability of telemedicine abortion in the state found that it was just as safe as abortions performed in the presence of a physician.
There is nothing to suggest that telemedicine abortion is dangerous, but that is the claim that Barbieri is making anyway.
http://www.salon.com/2015/02/24/law...ected_question_was_about_safety_of_the_woman/
Tuesday morning, the Idaho Legislature introduced its fourth bill of this legislative session that limits a woman’s right to an abortion.
This latest bill is a rewrite of a bill introduced last week that bans telemedicine, but only concerning women’s health.
According to Idaho Medical Association spokesman Ken McClure, the IMA approached the bill’s sponsor, Idaho Chooses Life Executive Director David Ripley, with the following message: “We can’t make this work in the real world.”
In an attempt to stop a train wreck, the IMA offered to help with the bill’s language to prevent it from endangering women’s healthcare more than it already did.
In other words, Idaho Chooses Life wanted to take away healthcare options for women, yet the bill was written so badly the group nearly blundered into taking away more rights from women than they intended.
(Did Republican women decide they could not support another anti-abortion bill, because Republican men did not notice how much harm they were doing Again ?
Here’s the bottom line: Idaho Chooses Life drafted a bill limiting women’s medical choices without consulting the Idaho Medical Association.
They say their bill is about women’s safety. If it was, you’d think they would have consulted with a doctor.
http://www.betteridaho.org/2015/02/idahos-war-women-update/
