Courtesy of Talking Points Memo:Our campaign bumper sticker: If babies had guns, they wouldn't be aborted. stockman2014.com #gosnell #tcot twitter.com/ReElectStockma…
— Rep. Steve Stockman (@ReElectStockman) April 12, 2013
Rep. Steve Stockman's (R-TX) re-election campaign wants its followers to know they have a new official bumper sticker out that finally combines what most assumed were unrelated debates over gun control and abortion. From the campaign's Twitter feed, which is linked to on the candidate's official website.
Just in case you cannot locate the wing nuts and paint chip eaters in Texas, I think watching for this bumper sticker might help with that endeavor.
Damn!
By the great mind that thought Ted Nugent should be at the State of the Union. 'Nuff said.
ReplyDeleteOne small step toward locking up women who have abortions.
ReplyDeleteIf vaginas had guns, they wouldn't get raped.
ReplyDeleteLOL. Sadly, someone might actually take that as a good idea - oh, wait, they did..
DeleteGood one! Someone should tweet that to that twit.
DeleteGreat comment!
DeleteAwesome idea...how about just rose thorns that come out as needed?
DeleteIf penises had guns, no one would be raped, and there would be no more babies, as I'm certain the men cleaning the guns would have lots of little accidents.
If fetuses had guns, they couldn't fly on airplanes, enter federal buildings, most courts, many sporting events, etc.
DeleteAnd, of course, they are liable to prosecution for concealed carry without a permit.
I think a good set of shark-like teeth "down there" would be more of a deterrent.
DeleteCan you imagine being a democrat and living in TX? Must be much the same in AK! Yuke!
ReplyDeleteOr Kansas.
DeleteMy son and his wife are there, but they are outside Houston, which is pretty blue. he just shakes his head. Lots.
DeleteWell when you look at the states that are trying to ban abortion, and some are successful , in effect by laws they are passing I think this will force the Supreme Court to revisit Roe vs Wade, and that is not a good thing with the current judges.
ReplyDeleteI agree, but that was the GOP strategy all along. They have been planning this for decades and only after the teagic appearance of one Sarah Palin did they get enough momentum. The hots for her vagina could be said to be the impetus for regulating every other vagina in the country.
DeleteRight-wing talk shows turned White House blue
ReplyDeletehttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2013/04/11/right-wing-talk-shows-turned-white-house-blue/
Let me see, if fetus'/babies had guns, they would be able to shoot so they wouldn't be aborted? What exactly are they shooting?
ReplyDeleteprobably not a good idea to shoot through the uterus and cause a rupture, leading to death of the fetus
or perhaps they would shoot the doctor by carefully aiming the gun through the birth canal - except I'm not sure that's a straight shot and could cause death to the fetus
hopefully they have good enough aim to miss the umbilical cord or it would mean death.
and they would pull the trigger with ?
the recoil, throwing the baby against the uterine wall would probably be okay cuz the baby isn't as calcified as people, and the water would protect it. Probably.
So I sent Rep. Stockman this article. I thought he'd understand.
Deletehttp://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-shocked-by-prenatal-shooting,378/
There is no sense in trying make sense of that stupid statement. At the age when the fetus might be aborted, it is doubtful that it has a trigger finger that can be moved on purpose. The fetus won't be able to see, and yes, Mom is bound to get wounded as the bullet passes through her body because there is not a straight line of fire. Nobody is every asking how the gun got in there to start with, and how in the world a woman can carry an assault weapon in her uterus when it can barely accommodate the growing fetus. Of course it is the senseless muttering of a person who is totally crazy.
DeleteArming fetuses. How adorable -- and on a bumper sticker so the black and white, non-linear thinking crowd (ie those who drool after the Palins) can easily digest it!
ReplyDeleteIn all seriousness though, who is supposed to feed, clothe, and shelter all these 'blessins' when they become actual living breathing people born to poor and low-income women who really didn't want them in the first place? Sure, adoption is an option, but it's not a cure-all (evidenced by the number of children already in foster care) and conservasloths already don't like paying taxes.
Instead of all the punitive actions falling on we simple, addled womenfolk, how about a bill that demands all men undergo reversible vasectomies as a means of ending abortions? When the man proves he is in a position to take care of a baby, then he can have the procedure reversed!
Another interesting proposal I've seen has been creating a DNA database of all men in each state so that when these babies get here, they can be matched up with their daddies in order to collect support!
Outrageous? Yes, but no more so than some of the brilliant ideas these idiot regressives have put forth.
Exactly. Why is NONE of these bills directed at making men responsible for whatever they do with their penises? And why is there not a religious uproar over Viagra being a covered medicine in all insurance policies? I mean, why does an overweight middle aged and older man need to keep having sex?
DeleteI read that the biggest increase in STDs is in this age group, because the guys are using Viagra and cheating on their wives.
And why should WE be paying for some horny old guy to have sex? I know, post a video for Rush to masturbate to.
If these morons were at all interested in ending abortion, they would be pushing for more contraceptive coverage, not less or none, and they would be all for educating our young people so they can avoid a pregnancy. Instead, we get 'magic' solutions. Make abortion AND contraception unobtainable, and then take sex ed out of the schools. Somehow, there will be no unwanted pregnancies. None. Maybe all those babies with their baby Glocks in utero will kill themselves?
Ohforfuckssakes. When will we be free of these idiots?
ReplyDeleteWell damn, i sure wouldn't want to be birthin' that baby!
ReplyDeletePush, push, squeeze - boom...
On a serious note, wouldn't floating around in all that amniotic fluid be bad for the gun? And where does the fetus keep the extra ammo? Does the fetus get to have any target practice? Who teaches gun safety to a fetus? Do armed fetuses need to have a background check? What about gun safety for fetuses?
The stupid - it just keeps coming!
At first I laughed at the overwhelming stupidity of the most stupid and fringiest member of Congress. But is this a campaign promise that Stockman is going after abortion providers and women who seek abortions? Or worse?
ReplyDeleteIf babies had guns, there would be a lot of dead people (depending on the ammunition type, magazine size, fire rate, etc)
ReplyDeleteI posted this on an earlier blog entry, but it really belongs here:
ReplyDeleteIf I recall correctly, there were two "babies" in the news recently that had access to loaded guns. One killed the wife of the man he was visiting, the other killed the next-door neighbor's kid.
Yeah, let's arm kids and fetuses, and the cat and EVERYONE ELSE who has NO IDEA how to handle a loaded weapon, nor the sense to know not to point & shoot it at someone. Because, you know... 2nd Amendment and Patriots.
That there is your well-regulated militia in action, folks.
Just when I thought I've seen it all, this mensa wannabe suggests arming fetuses?
ReplyDeletethis is just too stupid for words.
ReplyDeleteI can see the followup advertisement after the fetus has held off the abortionists with his assault rifle. Once born, that baby is going to be a dangerous character. By the time he goes to school, with all of the other kids, who are armed an dangerous, the bad guys won't think of attacking a school again. Yes, that's it. Arm the children to prevent another Sandy Hook attack. And, they can protect Mom in the shopping center or the movie theater. What a great idea, guns for babies, because there is no age limit in owning a deadly weapon.
ReplyDeleteIt just goes to show how they see women, as only useful making sammiches and babby's. And if you have the nerve to try and terminate these 'joys,' then it aught to hold your uterus hostage for 40 weeks.
ReplyDeleteFreedom!
Sure they would be aborted. They would be aborted by a new abortion method: "blowing up the uterus."
ReplyDeleteStupid, stupid, stupid, stupid....