America’s #1 Abortion Chain Just Dropped $1 Million on Terry McAuliffe


Well isn’t this special…

The ad opens by pointing out the hundreds of decisions that women make each day, from picking groceries to buying homes.

“And we make them ourselves,” says the narrator, Cecile Richards, president of Planned Parenthood Votes. “But Ken Cuccinelli is intruding on our most personal decisions.”

Richards lists off some of Cuccinelli’s stances, including his call for a ban on all abortions, “even when a woman’s health is in danger.”

“Cuccinelli doesn’t trust women,” Richards says at the end of the ad. “So how can we trust him to be governor?”

Because going to the abortion clinic and the green grocer are morally equivalent, right?

The Washington Post doesn’t quite cover all the grisly details, but if anyone has any question about McAuliffe’s fanatical devotion to abortion, just listen to their spokesman:

“Ken Cuccinelli has spent his entire career trying to interfere in Virginians’ private lives,” Josh Schwerin, a McAuliffe spokesman, said in a statement Tuesday. “Virginians can surely expect that as governor, Cuccinelli would abuse his power and attempt to impose his personal extreme ideology on all Virginia families.”

…like say, dropping millions of dollars into a race to keep the abortion industry flourishing in Virginia — that sort of extreme agenda?


Hope Bill Bolling realizes who and what he’s endorsing

  • Pingback: Virginia: Abortion Lobby Dropping Big Money on McAuliffe | JHPolitics()

  • MD Russ

    You mean a special interest group spends money opposing a candidate who is counter to their agenda? I’m shocked! (With apologies to Captain Renault in “Casablanca.”)

  • Pookasmom

    It is because of this very thing that I have a “Women for Ken Cuccinelli” sign in my yard. The ridiculous lies of the McAuliffe ads turn my stomach.

    • MD Russ

      It is a “ridiculous lie” that Ken Cuccinelli opposes abortion in the case of a 13-year-old girl who is pregnant because she was raped by her own father?

      And before anyone accuses me of worst-casing this or putting up a straw man, please note that Shaun has chosen to illustrate his anti-PP post with a late-term abortion. That is what I call a worst case.

      • David Obermark

        I would hope we could get to a compromise on this very difficult issue. How about 14 weeks? After that the woman loses the complete ability to choose by herself? Would exceptions be allowed? Yes, but it would be difficult to qualify for the exceptions.

        Science seems to point out that the fetus that is developing within the womb has no evidence of the type of brain activity that denotes consciousness exists prior to then.

        I describe myself as pro-choice. If I had my way, I would insist the choice was made early, before the point science proves the soul is now present.

        Meanwhile…. Ken Cuccinelli wants to outlaw birth control. He claims he would not push for such a prohibition as governor, but as close as we came during the last Virginia legislative session, he might not need to push for it. The only thing he would need to is sign the bill that appeared on his desk into law.

        When Ken served in the legislature, he sponsored bills that would have made birth contraception illegal.

        Ken is more Catholic then the Pope.

        • Pookasmom

          The rights of children should not 100% supersede the rights of the woman’s body, but neither should the “rights” of the woman supersede the humanity of the child she carries. Birth control is easily obtainable (and will continue to be in Virginia) and there needs to be some responsibility here. Abortion should not be used as birth control…. period. Yes, Ken Cuccinelli is very heavily pro-life. Yet, he started a sexual assault prevention group in college to prevent sexual assault on his college campus. But Virginia has alot more concerns that this. The scare tactics used to turn the tide of McAuliffe are sickening. Abortion and birth control issues are far down the list of things we should be concerned with. Any changes in those laws will be stopped by the courts. I am far more concerned about the employment and infrastructure of Virginia (all of Virginia… not just the metro parts). We have the highest Corporate tax. McAuliffe doesn’t care.

          • MD Russ

            Not true about the Corporate tax. Virginia is 6%. Many other states are 7-10%, including West Virginia and Pennsylvania of all places. Why do you think so many corporations such as Hilton, Northrop Grumman, and others have relocated to Virginia?

            The rest of your comment is just as erroneous, but you don’t care so I won’t bother arguing with you.

          • Pookasmom

            MD Russ, You are correct on the corporate taxes. I do apologize for my error. To say that the rest of my post is untrue (erroneous) is an untrue statement. It is well known that Ken Cuccinelli started a sexual assault prevention group in college. That’s public record. It is also true that he is pro-life. He does not think abortion is the answer to any situation except in the life of the mother. Having met a young woman who was the product of incest and whose mother chose life, I would agree with him. We would disagree on that. But, each of us is welcome to our opinions. But at least I can admit when I am in error. A good discussion considers that both parties are worthwhile to have an opinion. Unfortunately there are too many who feel only one opinion is worthwhile.

  • Edward N Virginia

    So, if you oppose the autonomy of women in making choices about their health, what do you interpose?

    And if you interpose a government agency aren’t you creating the same sort of so-called ‘death panel’ sort of government agency interfering in individual health decisions that the TEA Party and other Republicans used to discuss Affordable Care?

    Please answer the question: since you oppose the autonomy of competent adult women in making their own health choices, what are you substituting for that autonomy?

    If you cannot answer that question, shut up: since you’re obviously just playing idiotic bumper sticker politics.

    • Mr Green Jeans

      A lot of the teatards go on and on about property rights. evidently, it is wrong for government to tell someone what they can or cannot do with their land. Yet it is perfectly acceptable for government to tell a woman what she can or cannot do with her body.

      • Edward N Virginia

        Thank you. And, we see that NO A SINGLE one has answered our question:

        since you oppose the autonomy of competent adult women in making their own health choices, what are you substituting for that autonomy?

        They won’t answer because they believe that their version of THEOCRACY-OLIGARCHY should stand in the place of individual moral autonomy! But they don’t want to tell us that.

        • Nick Bukowski

          You’re creating a fictional situation. “oppose the autonomy of adult women in making their own heath choices”. I do not oppose women making their own health choices. They certainly should make their own choices. Individual liberty is very important. But Abortion is not “women’s health”. It is the killing of an unwanted child. Half of those children (or more) are women. You don’t seem to care about their health. And in the whole abortion argument, you forget that the woman chose to have sex, fully knowing that a potential consequence of sex is the creation of a child. I don’t think it would be wrong to have a govt that protected the rights of all people (including the unborn). If a woman doesn’t want to get pregnant, she shouldn’t be having sex. It is very destructive as a society that we encourage having sex whenever you want and killing the product of this action out of convenience. Utterly disgusting. Where is the personal responsibility?

          • Edward N Virginia

            PARDON, but you have no data to support your opinions.

            you said ‘the woman chose to have sex’ :

            WRONG! in many cases pregnancies result from a myriad types of sexual abuse, sexual coercion, and sexual violence.

            So, why aren’t you insisting on laws, policies, and programs – at the community and family level – that will absolutely end all sexual abuse, sexual coercion, and sexual violence?

            you said that women ‘know that potential consequences of sex is a child’:

            WRONG! Virginia DOE does not require or support continuing, comprehensive, science-based, culturally competent beginning appropriately at early ages, through the school life. There are uncounted false ideas about sex, sexuality, sexual behaviors, and pregnancy. Further there are countless contradictory beliefs in communities that are not science-based, that undermine what science-based education that is available.

            So, why aren’t you insisting on continuing, comprehensive, science-based, culturally competent beginning appropriately at early ages, through the school life?

            you mention the notion of ‘convenience’: IN REALITY, contraception is NOT CONVENIENT for many women: it is costly for them, unavailable for them, and not easy to use without a male partner who support the contraceptive choice.

            So, why aren’t you insisting on accessible, available, affordable contraception for every Virginia girl or woman, in every county, town, city, and area; and insisting on legal penalties on men who do not use contraception. WHY SHOULDN’T IT BE A CIVIL OFFENSE FOR A MAN NOT TO USE A CONDOM WHEN THE WOMAN ASKS HIM TO USE A CONDOM? WHY NOT REQUIRE ANY MAN WHO WANTS TO HAVE SEX WITH A WOMAN TO HAVE CONDOMS READY TO USE?

            you too quickly – and contrary to evidence, data, and reality – and also contrary to morality! – impugn women’s ‘responsibility’ without a mention of men’s ‘responsibility’

      • Pookasmom

        Name calling always garners support. But it shows the lack of integrity of the author. As for property rights v. “women’s rights”, I would ask you who gives the children rights? A woman has the right to birth control and keeping her pant(ies) on. With abortion the child has no rights. Even were we to forbid abortion after 4-6 weeks I would at least not be up in arms. (Though I am still opposed.) But we murder viable children and call it legal. Shameful. And as a woman I can say that fully and without a thought. Birth control is readily available. Use it! (And abortion isn’t birth control… it’s taking a life for your indiscretion.)

  • Edward N Virginia

    AND, furthermore, why aren’t you fiercely seeking to establish, to reinforce, and to sustain programs that are PROVEN to help prevent unwanted pregnancies:


  • I don’t give a damn about abortion. Even if it’s outlawed (and it won’t be), you’ll never stop it. Hello from Southside, where the issue is jobs.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.