Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She’s also talking about running for office by the way .. a “definite maybe” she says ..
—-
During her first stop in New York City, Ms. Clinton claimed that Roe v. Wade has been good for America’s economy because it enabled women to enter the workforce and contribute $3.5 trillion to the economy. And that alone, she asserts, should motivate citizens to cherish and support abortion.
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who entered the workforce between 1970 and 2009 would not have done so without access to abortion. Based upon economic and social trends it is much more likely that many, if not most of them, would have been employed outside of the home regardless of having an abortion or giving birth.
Considerable evidence conflicts with her basic premise that abortion on demand, the result of Roe and its companion case Doe, benefits America, even through the lens of economics.
She’s also talking about running for office by the way .. a “definite maybe” she says ..
—-
During her first stop in New York City, Ms. Clinton claimed that Roe v. Wade has been good for America’s economy because it enabled women to enter the workforce and contribute $3.5 trillion to the economy. And that alone, she asserts, should motivate citizens to cherish and support abortion.
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who entered the workforce between 1970 and 2009 would not have done so without access to abortion. Based upon economic and social trends it is much more likely that many, if not most of them, would have been employed outside of the home regardless of having an abortion or giving birth.
Considerable evidence conflicts with her basic premise that abortion on demand, the result of Roe and its companion case Doe, benefits America, even through the lens of economics.
Hillary was no more New Yorker than most of us are, but it didn't keep her from pretending to be so for her own political ambitions. Now if she cannot become president, she is grooming her daughter.
Trouble is that despite all the ill gotten gains from the Clinton Foundation, Chelsea is not as ruthless and dishonest as her famous parents, so I doubt she we be able to follow in their footsteps.
Chelsea Clinton has lived and worked in New York for 18 years, longer than she has ever lived in any other state.
How long would one have to live in a state before you would consider them a non-carpetbagger? Serious question.
Exactly. By that definition both Ronald Reagan (born/raised in Illinois) and George W. Bush (born/raised in Conn.) were carpetbaggers when they ran for governor of Calif. and Texas, respectively.
Chelsea Clinton claims legalized abortion has enabled women to contribute $3.5 trillion to economy
However, had the 50 million people who were aborted grown up and earned an average of only $ 30,000 per year they would have contributed 1,500 TRILLION to the economy. EVERY YEAR. PLUS, Social Security would not be in the state it's in.
She’s also talking about running for office by the way .. a “definite maybe” she says ..
—-
During her first stop in New York City, Ms. Clinton claimed that Roe v. Wade has been good for America’s economy because it enabled women to enter the workforce and contribute $3.5 trillion to the economy. And that alone, she asserts, should motivate citizens to cherish and support abortion.
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who entered the workforce between 1970 and 2009 would not have done so without access to abortion. Based upon economic and social trends it is much more likely that many, if not most of them, would have been employed outside of the home regardless of having an abortion or giving birth.
Considerable evidence conflicts with her basic premise that abortion on demand, the result of Roe and its companion case Doe, benefits America, even through the lens of economics.
She’s also talking about running for office by the way .. a “definite maybe” she says ..
—-
During her first stop in New York City, Ms. Clinton claimed that Roe v. Wade has been good for America’s economy because it enabled women to enter the workforce and contribute $3.5 trillion to the economy. And that alone, she asserts, should motivate citizens to cherish and support abortion.
There is no evidence to suggest that the women who entered the workforce between 1970 and 2009 would not have done so without access to abortion. Based upon economic and social trends it is much more likely that many, if not most of them, would have been employed outside of the home regardless of having an abortion or giving birth.
Considerable evidence conflicts with her basic premise that abortion on demand, the result of Roe and its companion case Doe, benefits America, even through the lens of economics.
Another abortion loving democrat who thinks she is going to be voted in due to her name.
Sound familiar?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
