Liberal attacks women's rights.

Boxer's comment was certainly a low blow and offensive, however I don't think she was attacking women's rights as much as she was the war in Iraq.

 

And that could change in thew blink of an eye.

Luke Chapter 18


10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.
11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.
12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.
13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.
14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

 

That is factually inaccurate. Boxer attacked Rice for her support of the Iraq invasion when Rice knew or should have known that al Qaeda did not operate in Iraq (Bush's own State Department prepared a list of countries al Qaeda was know to operate out of and Iraq was conspicuous in its absence - Bush signed off on the report).

As for the remark on how Rice would not lose a chiild to the war, it was made AFTER Boxer stated that she herself would not.

Where is the attack on women's rights? There simply isn't any.

 

I believe you are right. In her rush to be purely offensive and nasty, she failed to foresee the effect her remarks would have on those who take their rights as women seriously.

 

She's a carbuncle on California's and the nations but. She is by no means alone.