When you look at the consistency of "Pro-life" people in their political views about death and war and health care it is pretty crappy, but when you look at it as being part of an anti-woman agenda it makes way more sense. Pro-lifers are against women making the same pay as men, they want to make women who are raped pay for their own rape examinations. Some of the same people who call themselves "Pro-life" are so anti-woman that if a woman is raped and a child results from that rape they would force the woman to give birth to that child. When Ron Paul stated that he would allow some abortions as President in the case of "honest rape" he will surely be met with visceral hatred from the so called "Pro-life" crowd because he isn't being sufficiently cruel to women. If this is compassionate libertarianism it is epic fail, because after the emotional and physical trauma of rape, nothing makes the little woman feel more at home than getting to prove her own innocence, and nothing says "Small Government" like making the government force women to give birth.

If a woman is raped by KBR employees 30 "Pro-life" Senate Republicans can be counted on to vote to protect KBR from the woman who they raped and Jon Stewart will make fun of them for it. At the time, Stewart said "I understand we're a divided country, some disagreements on health care. How is ANYONE against this?"

Seriously, how can anyone be against this?

The party of No is so deluded that they don't even know that no means no. No is the only thing these guys are good at, and they don't even know what it means.

Only dishonest people think there can be such a thing as "honest rape"

If a self proclaimed "Pro-life" Presidential candidate gets repeatedly accused of sexually harassing women or cheats on his wife that's okay with so called "Family Value" supporting "Pro-lifers", the liberal media must have made it up, and obviously he did it because he loves his country. What are the odds that the women who claim to have been sexually harassed or raped are telling the truth? Anti-woman.

And don't even get me started on the "Family Values" people. They are often the same guys as the "Pro-life" people, and they'd be thrilled if you carried that baby to term and then gave it up for adoption, just as long as neither of the loving parents who wants to care for that child and start a family are not homosexual or transgendered.

Because they are not "Pro-family values" as much as they are anti-gay, and if they had family values and wanted to really protect the institution of marriage shouldn't they really be trying to ban divorce instead?

These same people are not as consistently "Pro-life" as they are consistently anti-woman, and they've been anti-woman since a woman was once accused of having a relationship with a certain apple in the garden of Eden. Of course, much like in today's rapist versus pregnant rape victim debate the crazy people are having amongst themselves, the "pro-life" people unquestionably take the snake at his word in that story too and are still waiting for Eve to inconclusively prove her own innocence.

In fact, the "pro-life" people are actually very pro-death. Pro-War in every circumstance. Pro-death penalty. Some of them cheer the death penalty. That's as pro-death as you can get. Some "pro-life" people are so "pro-life" they can justify the murder of abortion providers. The people who say they are "Pro-life" even have an alternative to health care reform. It was aptly described as"Don't get sick, and if you do, die quickly". How can you be against giving sick people health care and call yourself "Pro-life"? You can't.

This begs the question, how do you find the kind of women who are stupid enough to vote for and advocate for taking away their own rights as a woman?

Which brings us back to Sarah Palin

Rant off



You can follow me on Twitter @JesseLaGreca