John McCain is against birth control or against the public funding of birth control? There is a vast difference here and I had not heard he was against pregnancy prevention.
Anyone?
Remember that this claim is coming from the same folks who believe that embryonic stem cell researach is currently illegal. They are apparently unable to comprehend the difference between banning something and refusing to support it with federal tax dollars.
“John McCain is against birth control or against the public funding of birth control?”
This is a typical leftist twist on an issue. If your against government funding on something then they often claim that you’re against it.
Mainly, he vetoes taxpayer dollars going to pay for abortions. No wonder the Abortocrats hate him. :)
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=53270&type=category&category=2&go.x=14&go.y=7
Democrats are incapable of seeing a difference. As far as they are concerned, if you are opposed to subsidizing something (art, education, employee training, birth control, housing, farming, whatever), you are against it. Period.
Somehow, the party of "nuance" is incapable of making any distinctions at all. A liberal I once knew told me often that if the government doesn't subsidize an artist, then that artist is being censored.
Boy if this is the main issue for not voting McCain some people are lame.
In liberalspeak, you're "against" anything you don't think should be publicly funded. In other words, if I don't think that all senior citizens should be provided with a catered lunch at government expense every day, I'm "against seniors having food" and "for starving seniors."