Babies Or Us

This is the contraceptive mentality come full circle.

A liberal Dem. Senator has linked artificial birth control to our prosperity. Can't have one without the other, says she.

Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) says it was women joining the workforce after World War II that helped the economy grow, producing a “strong and healthy middle class.” And that continues to be the case today, she told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Monday.

“And now, in very, very significant numbers, women are…a part of the workforce and have contributed greatly to allowing families to get ahead in the economy.

What permits that is women being able to control when or whether they have children and how many. And it is so basic to our economic prosperity that women have that control.”
These foolish and immoral liberals will be long dead when the demographic disaster of this immorality becomes full blow. The few babies that manage to get born between now and then will not be so lucky.

*subhead*“Basic to Our Economic Prosperity”…*subhead*


  1. Very short-term reductionist- view prosperity. On the whole, by all important measures, poverty and powerlessness and perdition.

  2. If you only look at a portion of the picture, I suspect you could prove just about anything. I think both parties are cheats and liars, but specific to the "D" in this article, she is speaking inconsistently with the party line and I suspect she will contradict herself before the month is over. Consider the fact democrats have made their money by saying there is a large increase in poverty. Biggest amongst women and children. This facts bear out. But what doesnt bear out is how she can reconcile the obvious inconsistency between economic propserity and growing poverty over the same period, by the same demographic. I dont think politicians realize we little voters are not totally stupid. We hear them speak out of both sides of their mouth. Im sure she wont be challenged on this, but its sad that the "D's" wrap their horrid ideology under the mask of intelligencia. Its insulting to those of us with a modicum of intelligence.

  3. Methinks they can have that control, if they think it's so necessary, without anyone else paying for it. Does she notice the irony of saying how important women are for families, when she's simulataneously talking about them not having families?

  4. You should see them when they are older and sicker. When they are no longer at the top of their game. Met many dumped by their long term significant other when they themselves have become a burden.
    Many ill, financially destitute and needy elderly are actually women that have suffered financial catastrophy, been exploited, abandoned and abused.

  5. Gail- it makes sense if you assume that no new families ever come about, except by "choice" when they're "ready" and "well established."

    Never mind that most of the folks I know who very, very carefully managed to exercise their choice and be very well situated before trying to have kids had a horribly hard time, or are having a hard time having even a single child.

    Ignoring moral questions, not having sex unless you're willing to have kids is a major counter-balance to things like "but I want a new car...."

  6. Yet, this same prosperous, independent woman will demand her share of Social Security and Medicare. Who does the good Senator believe pays for the seniors Golden Years.


Post a Comment