Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Bob Marshall Hits Back

By Greg L | 20 February 2012 | 13th HOD District, US Senate, Prince William County | 38 Comments

Delegate Bob Marshall responds here to some of the hyperbole coming out of Democrats and their mainstream media acolytes regarding HB1. Nice mix of humor and facts here. Not that I expect the left to ever acknowledge the truth here, but it would be nice to see them make a policy argument other than the utterly silly “this bill requires we rape pregnant mothers.”

Bob is going to make a fine U. S. Senator if he can keep driving the left nuts like this. Let’s give him that chance.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

38 Comments

  1. Satchmo said on 21 Feb 2012 at 10:41 am:
    Flag comment

    I would like this buffoon to explain to me his referenced and stated concept of “lawful assisted conception”? This apparently is one of his conceptual justifications for this bill.

  2. Doug Brown said on 21 Feb 2012 at 10:47 am:
    Flag comment

    The extreme critics are truly idiots. To equate a medical procedure with rape is moronic, which leaves such hysterical abortion defenders on the what side of their mock debate? Rape is worst than rape and muder? And the left claims social conservatives, like Santorum, are blind ideologues.

  3. Satchmo said on 21 Feb 2012 at 11:04 am:
    Flag comment

    Doug, I would say any unwanted object shoved into a vagina constitutes rape.

  4. Satchmo said on 21 Feb 2012 at 11:09 am:
    Flag comment

    Also, Marshall should just cut the crap and stick to the debate to make abortion illegal. He can’t seem to get that going, so he resorts to ridiculous ideas to get around things. Stand up and fight the law, don’t make issues that make VA a national laughingstock.

  5. Doug Brown said on 21 Feb 2012 at 11:32 am:
    Flag comment

    Satchmo,

    I know very few people who want to get a colonoscopy, but I doubt few threaten to file sodomy charges against their proctologists.

    As for your choice of words “unwanted object,” “shoved,” abortion advocates are great at trying to come up with words and terms that already have very precise definitions and then calling their opponents ignorant because they don’t go along with their imaginary world, you know what I mean Satchmo?

  6. Satchmo said on 21 Feb 2012 at 1:41 pm:
    Flag comment

    Doug, the State doesn’t require you to get a colonoscopy, big difference.

    The State wants to MANDATE trans-vaginal ultrasound. Nothing “mandated” about getting a colonoscopy.

    Also, I’d still want someone to explain to me what Marshall means when he says, “lawful assisted conception”. While at it, I’d also like an explanation for his statement that “… most abortions come as “matters of lifestyle convenience.”

    This guy is in the stone ages.

  7. Doug Brown said on 21 Feb 2012 at 3:29 pm:
    Flag comment

    Satchmo,

    It’s not ultrasounds for everyone, it’s ultrasounds for women who are seeking to have a medical procedure, a medical procedure that has not been regulated or subjected to the practice of sound safety protocols as closely as it would have if it were any other medical procedure other than a procedure as poltically perverted as Abortion.

    And if you insist on loose terminology and language when you talk about “ages” and “rape” are you introducing the abortion industry’s complicity in regularly covering up statutory rape at Planned Parenthood Clinics? Is that where you are wandering off to next?

    How about instead of losing all semantic sensibility and reason everytime that Marshall introduces a Bill or discusses the issue of Abortion, why not use it as an opportunity to clean up an industry which allows horror stories like the one recently out of Philly simply because they are blinded by an ideological rigidity they project on others?

  8. DJRippert said on 22 Feb 2012 at 12:17 am:
    Flag comment

    The ultrasound is an unnecessary procedure. It would be mandated only to help “shame” a woman into walking away from an abortion.

    I hate abortion. I oppose abortion.

    However, Roe v Wade is a Constitutional fact.

    Forcing women to have unnecessary ultrasounds is an attempt to circumvent the legitimate Constitutional process which resulted in Roe v Wade.

    I support the second amendment. I applaud the overall decision in Heller.

    Any attempt to circumvent the Constitution by mandating unnecessary limits to my “right to bear arms” would be wrong.

    If the Constitution, as defined in the Second Amendment and the Heller decision, must be upheld then why shouldn’t the Constitution, as defined in Roe v Wade also be upheld.

    No nattering. No hair splitting. No double standard. Either you believe in the Constitution or you don’t.

  9. Disgusted said on 22 Feb 2012 at 12:38 am:
    Flag comment

    So how do you propose to establish the age of the baby without an ultrasound? Seems like a pretty necessary thing, if you ask me.

  10. Doug Brown said on 22 Feb 2012 at 1:38 am:
    Flag comment

    DJRippert,

    Why do you hate and oppose abortion? Why would the woman be ’shamed’? Is new knowledge, a more informed and better understanding of what one is about to do a cause for shame? Have you ever counseled or had to comfort women who have had multiple abortions? It was not uncommon for me to speak with women in the former Soviet Union who had multiple abortions, it could be as many as 6 to 8, do you think we really have engaged in an open and honest discussion about the negative health and psychological impact of “the constitutional right” to abortion on women’s health in this country?

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/feb/20/disclosing-the-abortion-suicide-association/?page=2

    I don’t believe in the Constitution, I believe in a God and the concept of Natural Law from whence the Constitution is inspired, but the Constitution and its interpretation by men and women is subject to human error, whether it is slavery or finding in it an implicit right to abortion.

  11. Satchmo said on 22 Feb 2012 at 10:06 am:
    Flag comment

    Doug, keep your church and religious feelings out of the Constitution and you’ll be better off.

    I don’t want any preacher telling me what the Constitution says and I don’t want any politician telling me what my Bible says.

    Disgusted, where did you get your medical degree? An ultrasound, especially a transvaginal ultra sound, is not necessary to determine the age of the fetus.

    BTW, Bob Marshall is doing wonders for his Senate campaign with all the negative attention he’s bringing to himself and the Commonwealth with his male purity posturing. What a sideshow. Thank God!

  12. G Man said on 22 Feb 2012 at 1:48 pm:
    Flag comment

    It is my understanding that a trans-vaginal ultrasound is already commonly performed by any abortionist who wants to keep his license. They consider it a “necessary procedure” to determine the gestational period of the fetus since VA law requires the abortion be performed in a hospital if at the second trimester; a second doctor involved if the baby is viable, and; prohibited in the third trimester unless life or health endangerment is involved. That can only be determined by a trans-vaginal ultrasound procedure.

  13. Doug Brown said on 22 Feb 2012 at 3:17 pm:
    Flag comment

    Satchmo,

    That’s freedom of religion not from religion, but then again you also seem to have a problem with freedom of speech.

  14. Disgusted said on 22 Feb 2012 at 3:54 pm:
    Flag comment

    The woman undergoing the abortion plans to have a knife / vacuum up her craw, but an ultrasound transducer is “rape?” Does she think the baby vanished via a magic trick?

    So when do we start hearing cries that a rape examination is itself rape?

  15. G Man said on 22 Feb 2012 at 11:22 pm:
    Flag comment

    BTW Satchmo the ultrasound bill you are foaming at the mouth about is not even Delegate Marshall’s. You are so quick to assume any bill related to abortion has to be his but the ultrasound bill is SB484 sponsored by one of your own - Jill Vogel.

  16. June - Reston said on 23 Feb 2012 at 6:19 am:
    Flag comment

    Marshall sponsored HB 462 and voted for it.

    None of these related bills have anything to do with matters that pertain to state. Our General Assembly is not a Revival Meeting. These bills are an attempt to force radical religious doctrine on the women of Virginia by throwing up unnecessary and unreasonable obstacles in an attempt to punish them when they choose a have a LEGAL medical procedure.

    Women are starting to fight back. A petition is being circulated and currently has 33,000 signatures to reverse these archaic laws (should McDonnell be stupid enough to sign them into law).

    FYI: Women represent 57% of the voters. Women today are intelligent, well read and quite capable of making decisions for themselves. They do not need a group of radical religious zealots in the General Assembly drafting laws to legislate state ownership of a woman’s womb.

    When Saturday Night Live grabbed this debacle and ran with it, it killed McDonnell’s hopes of any higher political aspirations. If SNL doesn’t kill his political career, the women of Virginia will.

    These laws are clearly a blatant and deliberate abuse of power to circumvent federal law and it will fly back and smack all those who voted for them square in the face.

    The internet is a wonderful thing — it documents the “oops moments” of politicians and allows them to be replayed during the campaigns until they crawl back under the rock from whence they came.

  17. June - Reston said on 23 Feb 2012 at 6:25 am:
    Flag comment

    G Man said on 22 Feb 2012 at 1:48 pm: It is my understanding that a trans-vaginal ultrasound is already commonly performed by any abortionist who wants to keep his license.
    ====================

    You are mistaken; a trans-vaginal ultrasound is not necessary to determine the stage of pregnancy. It would be helpful if you do your research before spouting off nonsense.

    But then, many of the legislators who drafted, sponsored and voted for this bill didn’t take the time to do their homework either.

  18. G Man said on 23 Feb 2012 at 8:15 am:
    Flag comment

    June-Reston I suggest YOU do your research. Start by going to the National Abortion Federation (www.prochoice.org) 2012 Clinical Policy Guidelines page 9 where it states clearly that a ultrasound exam is required to determine the gestational age of the little guy in the uterus.

    Policy Statement: Proper use of ultrasound can inform clinical decision-making and enhance the safety and efficacy of abortion care.

    Standard 1: Staff members who perform ultrasound exams and clinicians who interpret those exams must either show documentation that they have completed a program of training or must complete such a program developed by the facility. Training must include a period of direct supervision. Documentation of this training must be maintained. Following initial training, a system for evaluation of ongoing proficiency must be in place and documented.

    Option 1.01: The Ultrasound Training in Abortion Care CD-ROM developed by ARMS, NAF, and CAPS is a good resource for training and may be utilized as part of a training program.

    Standard 2: A system of clinical privileging must be in place for staff members who perform ultrasound exams and clinicians who interpret those exams. This system must include periodic review and renewal of these privileges.

    Standard 3: Patients must be informed of the purpose and limitations of the ultrasound exam in the abortion care setting.

    Option 3.01: This information may be provided in writing and the patient may be asked to sign a form acknowledging receipt of this information.

    Standard 4: The findings of all ultrasound exams and the interpretation of those findings must be documented in the medical record. Photos or another method of storing the ultrasound images must be included as part of the documentation. This documentation must also include the name(s) of the staff members who performed and interpreted the exam.

    Recommendation 4.1: A standard form for documenting findings and interpretation should be used.

    Standard 5: In the first trimester, the ultrasound exam must include the following:
    a. a full scan of the uterus in both the transverse and longitudinal planes;
    b. measurements to document gestational age;
    c. views to document the location of the pregnancy;
    d. evaluation of fetal number; and
    e. evaluation of the presence or absence of fetal cardiac activity.

    5.1: When clinically indicated, evaluation of other pelvic structures (i.e., adnexal structures and the cul de sac) should be performed and documented.

    Recommendation 5.2: Technology permitting both abdominal and transvaginal scanning should be available.

    Standard 6: In the second trimester, the ultrasound exam must include the following:
    a. fetal measurements to document gestational age;
    b. views to document intrauterine location of the pregnancy;
    c. evaluation of fetal number;
    d. evaluation of the presence or absence of fetal cardiac activity; and
    e. placental localization.

    Recommendation 6.1: When placenta previa is suspected in a patient with a prior uterine scar, or when other placental abnormality is suspected, a referral for further diagnostic imaging should be made.

    Standard 7: A procedure must be in place for further evaluation or referral of a patient in whom an intrauterine pregnancy has not been definitively identified or for whom an initial finding on the ultrasound may affect abortion management or future patient care.

    Standard 8: Real-time ultrasound scanners must be used. Ultrasound equipment must be properly calibrated and maintained.

    Standard 9: Ultrasound transducers must be disinfected between patients according to applicable infection control standards.

    4 Adequate precautions must be taken to
    protect both staff members and patients from the potential toxicity of chemical
    agents.

    To its credit Planned Parenthood follows these guidelines explicitly. They do not, however extend to the patient the courtesy of observing the results of this procedure.

    SB484 merely requires that ALL abortion clinics follow these NAF abortion guidelines, and requires that a patient who desires to do so be allowed to view the result.

  19. G Man said on 23 Feb 2012 at 8:29 am:
    Flag comment

    June - Reston again your ignorance is showing. Go back and howl where your not questioned. HB-462 was sponsored by 22nd District Delegate Kathy Byron. Did Marshall vote for the bill? Yes and so did 63 other Delegates.

  20. Doug Brown said on 23 Feb 2012 at 10:25 am:
    Flag comment

    G Man,

    June - Reston’s posts go beyond ignorant; they embody the very zealotry she attempts to project on any one who opposes her totalitarian embrace of Roe v Wade as the defining moment and essence of American feminism. Such zealotry is of course the refuge of the ideologue and those of mediocre mind and abilities.

    The ridiculous notion that she speaks for all women, the 57% of the electorate, is laughable but doesn’t stop her from implying that she could be speaking for them or represent their position. After all she pompously states:

    “Women today are intelligent, well read and quite capable of making decisions for themselves.”

    Unfortunately her posts and Kathy Byron’s sponsoring of HB-462 would both suggest according to her own zealot arguments, that women are not intelligent, well read and capable of making decisions for themselves.

    Of course, self-contradiction and ridiculous arguments normally don’t hinder the zealot, if anything it fuels their zealotry which contributes to the formation of a blind rage which then slashes out anything and anyone who threatens their worldview.

  21. Satchmo said on 23 Feb 2012 at 2:45 pm:
    Flag comment

    Doug,

    I love this quote of yours, “…her posts … suggest according to her own zealot arguments, that women are not intelligent, well read and capable of making decisions for themselves.”

    Do you work for Geico? Any chance you look like a caveman?

  22. June - Reston said on 23 Feb 2012 at 3:47 pm:
    Flag comment

    Doug, your MCP qualities are starting to show. Abortion i LEGAL, whether you like it or not.

    This bill is clearly a means to circumvent the federal law by throwing up obstacles and making it inaccessbile for women who choose this legal procedure.

    Fortunately, until we can organize and reverse these inane and archaic laws, we will work with women to provide transporation to MD and DC where women can have access to legal abortions without radical religious zealots who continue to have difficulty understanding their role in government and the costitution they swore to uphold.

    Your nonsense is falling on deaf ears. Women will continue to have safe and affordable abortions despite the radicals in the GA, and McDonnell can kiss any hopes of higher political aspirations good bye. Trust me when I say, this WILL happen.
    ====================

    G-Man, there are two types of ultrasounds. The non-invasive ultrasound has been used as part of the abortion routine since 1973 - not the trans-vaginal. I was one of the women who lobbied hard for Roe v Wade, so I know of what I speak

  23. Reasonable and Rational said on 23 Feb 2012 at 4:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    Any woman that votes Republican.. has no clue

  24. Doug Brown said on 23 Feb 2012 at 5:50 pm:
    Flag comment

    Satchmo, June-Reston, Reasonable and Rational et al,

    Your collective assumption that all reasonable and rational women share your position on abortion or the bills under consideration takes only one woman, who is intelligent, well read, and capable of making decisions for themselves, to demonstrate the fallaciousness of your posts, the fact that you seem unaware that one such woman, or more, may exist, brilliantly illustrates your tyrannical and totalitarian vision of American Feminism.

    Animal Farm or the Funny Farm would be a more appropriate place to find an audience who would be convinced of the reasonableness of your warped rhetoric.

    The Bills are obviously meant to chip away and make marginally more bearable the Roe v Wade regime under which we, give or take 50 million, now live. It does not threaten to overturn Roe v Wade, not withstanding your lame attempts to project your zealotry onto others.

  25. June - Reston said on 24 Feb 2012 at 4:37 am:
    Flag comment

    Reasonable and Rational, I disagree with your broad brush stroke comment that ALL Republican women subscribe to the idea ALL Republicans are radical religious zealots.

    This simply is not true. Women are intelligent enough to know this, and also intelligent enough to know which radicals are NOT Republican. These radicals are riding the coat tails of the party because their “issues” are so bizarre they knew they can’t carry them on their own.

    Republican voters will vote for responsible and moderate Republicans who draft legislation that pertains to matters of state and oust those who are attempting to circumvent Federal Law with these inane laws which WILL be overturned.

    Gman and Doug are beside themselves with their inane posts. They obviously have not been placed in a position where they are caught off guard and required to form an independent thought.

    As they become more militant and lash out with ad hominems, because they have nothing of substance to offer, it it clear they are out of control. This I find rather amusing.

    Meanwhile there is much work to be done to rid our General Assembly of radical relgious zealots.

  26. Doug Brown said on 24 Feb 2012 at 9:53 am:
    Flag comment

    June-Reston,

    Oh yes, let’s drag out of the closet the old straw man of ‘ad honminem’ attacks, from a poster who screams at the top of her lungs : ‘Purge the Religious Zealots!

    As for the ability to have an independent thought you obviously declared yourself independent from such a thinking life in 1973. Roe v Wade for you is the immaculate conception of a sick mindset where none of the negative consequences of Roe V Wade are to be considered or even mentioned when the state of American Feminism is discussed. Any challenge to the sanctity of Roe v Wade is another reason to grab your scapel to charge forth and slay the demons who dare to challenge the feminist utopia on earth you established in 1973.

    Here’s some advice, June-Reston, heroine stuck in 1973, chill out. Do American women, and men, a favor and admit that there have been some very negative and underexamined consequences of Roe v Wade on American women and American society in general. You may find Pro-Life proponents like Marshall disingenuous when it comes to their attempts to address some of those negative consequences, but it is zealots like you and Satchmo who scream bloody murder at any criticism of the legacy of Roe v Wade which plants the seed for that which you most dread. How ironic WILL that be?

  27. Satchmo said on 24 Feb 2012 at 12:59 pm:
    Flag comment

    Doug, Roe is the law. Get over it.

    If Marshall wants to overturn it then let him advocate for it. He’s a frustrated old man.

  28. Greg L said on 24 Feb 2012 at 1:34 pm:
    Flag comment

    So was the Dred Scott decision. I think we “got over” that.

  29. Doug Brown said on 24 Feb 2012 at 9:06 pm:
    Flag comment

    Satchmo,

    I might be wrong, but I’ve always assumed Marshall is an advocate for overturning Roe, and if not successful there, to at least promote a more informed and better health regime in which Roe operates.

    Why is that so bad? That seems reasonable and rational; what does not seem reasonable and rational is a blind devotion to a law which precludes any recognition, even if one is essentially pro-choice, pro-abortion, that the Roe regime/culture has also had negative effects on women’s health and society.

    The WPost article today, as is the norm for the Post, as a major media advocate for the Roe regime, mocks and ridicules the defeat of the Republican bills in Richmond. In some respects the ridicule may be deserved, “IF” the factual information is true in reality as opposed to the Post’s imagination, something one always has to take into account with the Post. Nevertheless, what is most telling about the Post article is how easily the debate about Roe always degenerates into a circus.

    Why is there little or no discussion of 50 years of Roe, the health consequences, new medical knowledge from advances in medical technology that should guide the abortion industry, the abusive and poorly regulated business and medical practices which has created a less than safe industry for women and underage girls, why are such issues so taboo?

    In many respects the abortion industry and its supporters reminds one of the tobacco industry, and their die-hard smokers, who spent years not only in denial of unpleasant truths but also ridiculing those who brought up the truth.

  30. June - Reston said on 28 Feb 2012 at 2:53 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg, Roe v Wade is the law and it will NOT be overturned despite people like Marshall and his ilk. I hope you can adjust.

  31. Greg L said on 28 Feb 2012 at 9:11 am:
    Flag comment

    That’s the same argument used to defend Dred Scott. Now we have the 14th Amendment.

    I’d like to see Roe overturned, and will do what I can to see that happens. I will never accept that murdering unborn children is OK.

  32. Wineplz said on 29 Feb 2012 at 11:33 am:
    Flag comment

    Apparently June-Reston has no clue how many “intelligent, well read” women, “capable of making decisions for themselves” agree with the law to turn on the doppler speakers and turn the viewing screen of the ultrasound towards the woman contemplating killing a baby.

  33. June - Reston said on 1 Mar 2012 at 7:05 am:
    Flag comment

    Greg, Roe v Wade has withstood more serious assaults from people more impassioned than you for 39 years and is still THE LAW.

    It is your right to stand by your personal and religious convictions,. As long as Choice is the law, then the choice to NOT have an abortion is also available. Dictating to women that they embrace yoru personal and religious beliefs is quite arrogant on your part and as the news is reporting, not well received in Virginia or elsewhere.

    Virginia doesn’t own my v a g i n a

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ybs_kDYrlQs

  34. June - Reston said on 1 Mar 2012 at 7:09 am:
    Flag comment

    Wineplz, you are mistaken.

  35. Doug Brown said on 1 Mar 2012 at 9:28 am:
    Flag comment

    Wineplz,

    June-Reston will decide who is an intelligent and well-read woman you need to be as silent and irrelevant as a fetus in a womb!

    June Baby,

    Our legislators will decide what the law will untimately be on whether human life begins in the womb or when you say so, and if and when they do decide it begins in the womb you and yours and are standing in a heap big pile of trouble. In the meantime, you’ll excuse us if we exercise our free will, our freedom of conscience, our free speech so that we don’t have to stand with you on that day or our own final day of judgement.

  36. Doug Brown said on 2 Mar 2012 at 10:46 am:
    Flag comment

    It is unfortunate that Marshall’s bill concerning when life begins became so intertwined with the ultrasound bill. (G-Man noted) The overreaction and lunacy of the radical feminists like June- Reston to the ultrasound bill which had opponents accussing the GA of being part of a conspiracy to committ mass rape in VA shouted down and drowned out the very reasonable arguments that Marshall was making concerning his bill on personhood. The shouting is a very ugly and insidious attempt to kill free speech on the abortion issue.

  37. Doug Brown said on 2 Mar 2012 at 11:25 am:
    Flag comment

    The Brave New World via Roe v Wade

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9113394/Killing-babies-no-different-from-abortion-experts-say.html

  38. The Bulletproof Monk said on 25 Jan 2013 at 8:13 pm:
    Flag comment

    “SB484 sponsored by one of your own - Jill Vogel.”

    Tried telling him this forever. Marshall is not the only one to be blamed for this… he’s inferred that Senator Black did it, too….with his other alias…Blackout.

Leave a Reply



Views: 883