Like the draft (if there were one, there would be no war), if men got pregnant then there would be none of this pro-life political posturing.

Thank you to the men and women who support a woman's right to choose and a woman's right to be in control of her own body. 

And shame on VERY CONSERVATIVE (and very priviledged) Ms. Holtzman-Vogel for not supporting women. An actual (real) example:  What would Ms. Vogel-Holtzman do had she been forced into a pregnancy at say a very mature age, after having already raised a family, and not being able to afford nor have the energy to raise another child (and her husband forbid her from an abortion or choosing adoption)? 

I'm so sick of these types of "moderate" Republicans (HA) forcing their political poop on us.  Disgusting. When will these types of politicians ever empathize with those who are not as priviledged as they are?  Vote Schultz!!! 

...Katherine Harris.

Ouch!  You know what though, and I never realized it before, but you're absolutely right!

Maybe she'll get on a pony for us in a cowboy hat!

One thing that really, truly repulses me about GOP mail--especially among the hypocritical "family values" crowd--is their incessant use and willingness to exploit images of their own children for political gain.

It's like they are subconsciously saying--"look at me and the babies I've made--they're proof of my values!"  Unfortunately for their kids, they are plastered all over the mail of thousands of people before they even understand what any of it means.  It seems to be the only credential that matters to many Republican primary voters.  Don't get me wrong--I'm not saying that families are not absolutely the most wonderful thing in life, and that people shouldn't be proud of them, or even that they don't have a place in electoral politics.  But when they are USED the way the are in these Vogel mailings, I just find it repulsive.  It doesn't, unfortunately, mean that someone will be a good, competent, trustworthy, or values-based politician because they are able to squeeze out oodles of beautiful lilly-white babies.  Sorry, but the list of disappointments is TOO LONG for that (Vitter, Craig, Allen, and DeLay are just a few that come to mind!).

I think a discrete and tasteful picture here and there of your family is very worthwhile, but don't make the exploitation of images of your kids the central message of your mailings.

That's just awful in my opinion.

come to think of it.  Shuddddder....

@ Doug in Mount Vernon: "It's like they are subconsciously saying--'look at me and the babies I've made--they're proof of my values!' "

My thoughts exactly - except that it's not subconscious, it's a totally deliberate statement...

It makes me sick to see her offspring plastered all over her campaign literature. Ok, so what that tells me is that either she doesn't know how to use birth control, or that she's good at laying on her back and spitting out kids, while a rich husband supports them all. But how does that make her qualified to represent me? She's probably pretty skilled at changing diapers & wiping butts, and she's obviously good at judging other people's reproductive choices, but what does she know about the legislative process?

I am so very disappointed in the Post for endorsing her.