Whether he is popular is really beside the point. Carolyn's assertion is accurate. Gov Lynch was not favorable to liberty causes as evidenced by his action on legislation like Right to Work, RGGI, Voter ID, etc. If that disparages his record, it is not because Carolyn pointed it out, but rather because those are the facts.

Voter suppression laws are anti-liberty, Gary.

Voter ID is not voter suppression (unless you mean it suppresses the dead or otherwise illegal voters). The Supreme Court saw it this way:

"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483.[2] Because Indiana's cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters' right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—is mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek." -Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (2008)

Gary, where are the fake voters? You and I both know the law is designed to suppress potential Democrat voters. That's why the Republicans came up with it.

Dave, a woman's liberty to choose what, exactly?

It depends on whether you believe that the liberty interest from the woman's choice interferes with the liberty interest of the unborn child.

I am inclined to believe that in most cases, the woman's right to choose was protected because she was free to choose whether or not to engage in the activities which led to pregnancy but I think you are arguing that she should get another chance to make that choice after the fact.

@ Carolyn

"Dave, a woman's liberty to choose what, exactly?"

Whether or not to have your rapist's baby. Sorry to "go there," but it's true. It's in the GOP's official platform. They don't think you can make your own decisions in that regard.

More false liberal talking points David! Rape, incest and the life of the mother are exceptions that Romney is in favor of.

David, there is a very big difference right now between the Democratic and Republican parties on the issue of abortion. The Republicans by and large are pro-life and the Democrats are by and large pro-abortion—and not just that it be legal and rare (as the party of Bill Clinton said), but that it be on-demand and paid for by the taxpayer, which is, in my opinion, very extreme. The difference between the two is stark and it belies their commitment (or lack thereof) to the dignity that we must—as a free loving people—give to each and every human being.

Science tells us that the newly-conceived human being is just that—a distinct human being. That human has its own distinct DNA. That human has its own blood type, which is its own and does not circulate from the mother at all. That human is a completely separate being from the mother who carries it, apart from a connection that provides nourishment.

So how can we ignore these scientific facts and let one human being legally harm another? In what other instance do we allow one human being to knowingly and willfully kill another? The answer is we don't (and if we do, we shouldn't). The reason that a Republican may oppose abortion in the instance of rape is not because Republicans are cruel and want to torture a brutalized woman, but rather because the result of that tragic and brutal attack was a human being that carries with it the dignity and legal protection that should be provided all human beings no matter their location, status, size, or mental capacity. And many believe we should not compound the evil of rape by adding to it the evil of murder.

@ Lorna

"Rape, incest and the life of the mother are exceptions that Romney is in favor of."

Romney has taken multiple positions on the issue of abortion (as he has with every other issue, with the exception of releasing his pre-2010 tax returns - he's steadfast there). Here's some factual information for you: http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/08/21/gop-platform-committee-would-ban-abortion-even-save-woman-life-adding-furor-over-senate-candidate-offensive-remarks-rape/z8RUoesNCeEfX5N0BXqWtJ/story.html

What about Mitt's crazy VP? Paul Ryan considers rape just ANOTHER METHOD OF CONCEPTION! Here are some actual facts on that matter: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/post/paul-ryans-abortion-problem/2012/08/30/1e1d34b2-f2d0-11e1-adc6-87dfa8eff430_blog.html

And I didn't claim "multiple-choice Mitt" currently opposes abortion without exception (although he surely would if that position polled favorably). What I said was banning abortion without exception is part of the GOP's official platform. http://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2012/08/21/gop-platform-committee-would-ban-abortion-even-save-woman-life-adding-furor-over-senate-candidate-offensive-remarks-rape/z8RUoesNCeEfX5N0BXqWtJ/story.html

I find it positively tragic that any woman - REGARDLESS of her own personal ideas about abortion - would stand for that choice being TAKEN AWAY from her.

Obama 2012.

@ Carolyn

You know who is "pro-abortion?" The nuts in the GOP who oppose sex education, AND contraception, and want to do away with Planned Parenthood (with the emphasis on PLANNED). The imbeciles in the "abstinence only" crown are responsible for countless abortions - legal or otherwise. Anyone who opposes educating kids about how their bodies work, and limiting access to contraception across the board, are PRO-ABORTION. Because that's exactly what those nutty, medieval viewpoints cause.

@ Carolyn
"The Republicans by and large are pro-life and the Democrats are by and large pro-abortion—and not just that it be legal and rare (as the party of Bill Clinton said), but that it be on-demand and paid for by the taxpayer..."

1. Nobody is "pro-abortion." To suggest otherwise is disingenuous, and ugly.

2. You're either misinformed, or deliberately misleading readers. Tax dollars DO NOT fund abortions. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/04/planned-parenthood/

Why would any woman give up sovereignty over her body? It's fine if YOU'D never have an abortion - even if raped by a family member. That would be YOUR PERSONAL choice, and it would and should be respected. Why anyone thinks that particular choice should be made for ALL women by one political party is astonishing to me.

Obama 2012.

@ Carolyn

"Science tells us that the newly-conceived human being is just that—a distinct human being."

Until it can survive outside the womb, it's not "distinct" - it's part of the mother.

Can you explain why nutty Republicans would refuse a rape victim emergency contraception? http://blog.pfaw.org/content/republicans-debate-who-least-favor-of-emergency-care-for-rape-victims To be clear - we're not even talking abortion here! This is about PREVENTING conception from taking place after a woman has been violated! WTF???

And why do Republicans who claim to be "pro-life" oppose free contraceptives, which dramatically reduces the number of abortions? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/05/us/study-finds-free-contraceptives-cut-abortion-rate.html?ref=contraception

The truth is, the Republican Party is packed with misogynists. Sadly, some of the worst misogynists are actually women themselves.

In any case, it's one thing to take a particular position on abortion - it's quite another to let a bunch of politicians take that position FOR you.

Obama 2012.

@ Dumpy

What I appreciate about your posts is the thought that goes into them; Always insightful comments and facts that propel the conversation forward. Kudos.

Obama 2012.

David, you say that a baby, during gestation, is part of the mother until it can survive outside the womb?!? So a baby that is at 8 months gestation is not? Really! Here's a fact for you. A pregnancy test, which test for beta chains, works because it looks for enzymes that are produced by a foreign body growing within the body. It is the same test used to test for tumor growth! Also, from the moment of conception, the baby has it's own unique DNA.

If we were to compare the differences in a fetus and a new baby and use that to distinguish humanness, then how do you explain the differences between a baby, that still is developing outside the womb? I mean we are not all walking around with basketball sized heads with a hole in the skull and cartilage where our joints should be!

Liberty does not mean license, nor does it mean anarchy. We do have the liberty to do what is right, but we do not have the liberty to do what is wrong—namely, that which harms another. "First, do no harm." Abortion, by definition, ends the life of a human being, and therefore falls outside of the scope of "liberty."

FYI — there are nearly no instances in which abortion must be used as a "medical treatment." (Doctors in Ireland, which is one of the last remaining countries where abortion is illegal and where the maternal death rate is VERY low, have said that there are no instances in which abortion must be used as a "medical treatment," but since I am not a doctor, I'm not comfortable using absolutes.) In most cases, abortion requires a 24-48 hour window where a woman's cervix can be dilated using drugs and devices. Given that long period of time, the "emergency abortion" argument is completely undercut—the fastest way to get a baby out in an emergency situation is not an abortion, but a c-section, which we all know results in a live child, not a dead one.

@ Ann

If Republicans really cared about "life" they'd oppose the death penalty, and be in less of a hurry to start wars.

If they really wanted to prevent abortion, they'd support sex education and contraception.

Instead, they force women to deliver rape babies and then pat themselves on the back for their "morality."

Obama 2012.

@ Dumpy

Funny AND informative! Ha ha "wires crossed" - I gotta remember that one!

Obama 2012.

David,
Hillary Clinton supported the war in Iraq. I did not.
Nor am I a big fan of the death penalty.
You are making broad assumptions.

Should I ask, how can one be against killing a convicted murderer but not against abortion?

@ Ann

My personal feelings about abortion are irrelevant. I won't ever have to make the decision - and neither you or any other person or party should be able to make that decision for another woman. It's a very personal decision. As for making broad assumptions, your comment "I'm unsure how anyone can support liberty without supporting :LIFE:" suggests that LIFE is paramount. I based my comment on that.

I'm glad to hear you're not a war monger and that you oppose the death penalty, though (because you'd have to if LIFE is really your primary concern) - in which case I suggest you avoid the GOP; They're all about the bombs and electric chairs.

Obama 2012.

Fake Republican super PAC... not women united... Shame on them and you

Oh Karl Rove is sooooo not a woman united.....

@ Jan

Thanks for pointing that out, but even if News Flash realized it was a fake, it wouldn't make any difference. He/she wouldn't hesitate to post it for a second.