Repub Lawmaker Now Supports Obama, Says GOP Presidential Candidates ‘Would Take Women Back Decades
Source: Think Progress
Republican Lawmaker Now Supports Obama, Says GOP Presidential Candidates Would Take Women Back Decades
By Alex Seitz-Wald on Mar 8, 2012 at 2:15 pm
New York Assemb. Teresa Sayward (R)
Questions about women and womens health have dominated the political debate over the past weeks, and at least one female Republican lawmaker is unhappy with her partys record. New York Assemblyman Teresa Sayward (R), who is retiring after serving a decade in Albany, told the New York political program Capital Tonight that she does not support any of her partys presidential candidates, because of their stances on women.
She also took an apparent shot at Republicans opposition to President Obamas birth control mandate, saying, Its disheartening for me to see our party move away from what it was always about and that is to stay out of peoples lives, let them live their lives, dont impose their religion on anybody else.
Asked which Republican candidate she supports, Sayward replied:
SAYWARD: I do not have a favorite in the presidential race, if I had to vote today, Id vote for Obama.
INTERVIEW: Really?
SAYWARD: Absolutely
Because I really, truly think that the candidates that are out there today for the Republican side would take women back decades.
Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/03/08/440746/ny-gop-lawmaker-women-back-decades/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EUhkBcK01iQ
babylonsister
(171,079 posts)Booster
(10,021 posts)eggplant
(3,912 posts)Why, a democrat, of course.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)Remember when we had two parties, and two candidates, and we'd argue for progressive policies and they'd argue for conservative policies?
Now we have a candidate that gets support from both sides of the aisle, and we argue about bases on the moon.
I sure wish we could go back to the "good ole days".
Son of Gob
(1,502 posts)into a swipe at President Obama. Actually it's more pathetic than funny.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)It wasn't a "swipe" at the President. It was an expression of frustration that our politics have moved so far to the right, that all sane people are on the "left" and the nuts are on the "right". It means we have a "one party" system. Not because "both parties are the same" but because there's only one rational party. It makes it easier to win elections, but harder to achieve any real progressive goals.
Truth is, it means that the semi-rational people on the right have a very tough choice to make. Vote for the insane, or vote for a person that the don't really agree with, but at least resides on this planet. Truth is, the Left is left with something of a similar choice. Vote for the guy that can see blue skies, or vote for the guy that is concerned about mind rays.
No one, on the left or the right, can believe that is a good way to run a country.
Lost-in-FL
(7,093 posts)...what I DON'T want, is repugs adopting Obama to keep their seat. We don't need the current members of the GOP and their nasty "my way or the highway" kind. We need people that thinks about the country, not their party positions.
beac
(9,992 posts)Hope she's ready to get "Rushed" by the Neanderthal wing of her party.
CanonRay
(14,111 posts)The Teabaggers will have her head on a plate.
randome
(34,845 posts)Let her vote her conscience. And if that comes up in favor of Democrats, that's fine by me.
Cal33
(7,018 posts)Dont call me Shirley
(10,998 posts)kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)didn't speak out.
But she is still a Repuke, and fundamentally NOT to be trusted. Where does she stand on all the OTHER issues near and dear to us?
Send her packing. Put a Dem in her spot.
Tom Ripley
(4,945 posts)Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)- K&R
DFW
(54,420 posts)I think we got the better end of that bargain.
I wonder if Joe Lieberman will support Romney this time around?
For that matter, will anyone even care this time around?
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)I didn't.
progressoid
(49,992 posts)ejbr
(5,856 posts)"buh-bye, now."
JoeyT
(6,785 posts)Its disheartening for me to see our party move away from what it was always about and that is to stay out of peoples lives, let them live their lives, dont impose their religion on anybody else.
Since when? I don't remember the Republicans ever doing anything but wanting to legislate sex and imposing their religion on others.
Was she frozen in ice and just thawed so she missed the last fifty years?
asfghjkyu
(10 posts)unkachuck
(6,295 posts)....cause me to update and re-evaluate my opinion of some Republicans....
....many complain how American politics has shifted to the right over the past few decades....well that shift has also placed many fair minded, moderate Republicans into the sphere of the Democratic Party...
....if you're looking for the moderate Republican values of yesteryear, you've come to the right place....
Oilwellian
(12,647 posts)are now the leaders of the Democratic Party. Throughout the short history of this country we have seen party doctrines change and new parties have emerged. I hope to see a more liberal party emerge in the near future. The Republicans can be the New Democrats they have become.
PS: But hey, won't it be great to never see or hear the word "Republican" again, except in historical discussion and history books?
Ter
(4,281 posts)Yeah, the candidates running today oppose abortion, but so did those guys she was happy to vote for and endorse.
HopeHoops
(47,675 posts)AllyCat
(16,205 posts)She is so right on this too. I've talked to 2 women this week who said they don't like Obama, but would probably vote for him or sit this election out because these GOP candidates are so awful for women.
alp227
(32,044 posts)She seems to be a Rockefeller Republican (Nelson Rockefeller, a former governor of NY, was an iconic moderate Republican and served as vice president under Gerald Ford.) Regardless, good on her!