Daines’ draconian assault on women - letter by Dan Lourie

I'm going to focus mostly on Mr. Lourie's use of language, something I've done in the past, mostly because his words are not designed to communicate, they manipulate and marginalize. It's this over-the-top rhetoric that makes it difficult to have constructive dialogue, and detracts from my ability and motivation to take him seriously. -------------------------------- Republicans’ unabashed (Unabashed: Not concealed or disguised; obvious. Mr. Lourie intends to use the word to impugn the Republicans, but he has previously used the word "insidious" [gradual and harmful: slowly and subtly harmful or destructive] to describe the agenda of those with whom he disagrees. Can we ask which it is, unabashed or insidious?)  war on women was born of reactionary ideology ("Reactionary ideology" simply means that something happened and those who oppose what happened "react" and attempt to change the results of the event) and fueled by astonishing hubris (Hubris means extreme pride or arrogance or a loss of contact with reality. I think you can start to see how it would be difficult to converse with a person who appears to believe that their ideological opponents are irrational, evil, and bent on destroying peoples' lives)  that allows men in government (We must note that there are pro-life women in government...) to presume the right to tell women what they can or cannot do with their own bodies. (Government, particularly leftists in government, are certainly happy to tell us what we can do with our own bodies all the time, so this hysterical rant rings hollow for me. Helmet laws, sugared drink limits, salt bans, and a thousand other things. But because it is convenient in this case, Mr. Lourie is outraged that some in government want to protect unborn babies)  That out-of-control agenda (These Republicans are loose cannons, indiscriminately wielding power)  attacking women was a major factor, through the alienation of both moderates and women, in their party’s overwhelming defeat in last year’s elections. (That's the leftist meme, but there's no evidence for it. Obama won 51% of the vote. There was a net gain of 13 seats by the Democrats in the US House, with Republicans maintaining a 17 seat majority, and the Democrats gained a net two seats in the Senate, with a total of 53 seats. This is hardly "overwhelming.")  They have clearly failed to learn from that experience, and once again pursue a draconian ("Draconian" meaning great severity, derived from Draco, an Athenian law scribe under whom small offenses had heavy punishments. So can we ask, what laws is he referring to, which would exact heavy legal penalties against women for committing small violations of the law?) program of assault on the rights of women. Congressman Steve Daines, ignoring the consensus of Americans across party lines, is out front, helping to lead the charge. He supported the 20-week abortion ban that ignores women’s health and safety, defying even the concerns of moderate Republicans. (A flat out lie. Yes, I called him a liar. He is so deeply inured, so completely all-in, he believes wholesale the leftist line without question. A Huffington Post poll indicate a 59% to 20% split in favor of the 20 week ban. Here are a couple of charts depicting the results: Mr. Lourie and people like him are clearly the extremists. The great majority of Americans disagree with them, and no amount of histrionics will change that. But of course, this is part of the delusion of the Left. They try to gin up support by pretending to be the majority, reasonable position, but they are in the margins. They try to make up for it by being loud. But these kinds of tactics are being unmasked, sort of like the curtain being pulled open on the wizard of Oz.) He cosponsored legislation blocking Title X funding to entities providing abortion services, despite 25,000 Montana women relying on health care services, like cancer screenings, from Title X clinics every year. (I automatically doubt the assertion, simply because he is the one making it. But to the point. The fact that an organization is providing cancer screenings is irrelevant if it is also killing unborn babies. Any sane person would oppose the entire organization, despite any good in might happen to do, if it is also doing something incredibly evil)  He cosponsored the “Blunt Amendment” allowing employers to refuse health care coverage for abortions or “other items or services to which issuer has moral or religious objection.” (Mr. Lourie is apparently pro-choice only when it involves killing babies.)  He cosponsored a bill to spend over half a billion dollars on abstinence-only sex education. (Leftists hate abstinence. They want as many people boinking as possible in every conceivable combination and situation. The idea is to make sex as free as possible, even to the detriment of other freedoms. In this conversation you will see one of the commenters actually assent to this idea.)  He cosponsored the Pro Life Act banning federal education funding to institutions with health centers making abortion-related materials available to students. (In other words, all the things Mr. Daines has done are all typical Republican positions. This is what is inflaming Mr. Lourie's hyperbole, that a Republican is actually acting like a Republican and is doing what he promised to do) Apparently that defeat has not tempered the reprehensible Republican positions on women’s health. Signs, however, point to the party’s inevitable irrelevance if they continue down this path. Former Bush advisor David Frum wrote, “We’ve had four years of self-defeating rage. Now it’s time for cool.” I hope Congressman Daines is paying attention, (To whom? Mr. Lourie's unhinged name calling? Or to the ones who elected him?)  and that he begins to represent and promote a system that values the availability of access to adequate health care, including reproductive care, for all women. Dan Lourie Bozeman