VIRGINIA BEACH, VA – Today, 20-year Navy veteran and former small business owner Congresswoman Elaine Luria (VA-02) released “Robert” and “Dr. Archer,” her seventh and eighth television ads of the 2022 cycle.
The two ads highlight the Congresswoman’s commitment to delivering for the people of Coastal Virginia and the danger that Jen Kiggans poses to women across the Commonwealth and the country.
“The right to choose is a decision that politicians like Jen Kiggans and the government should have no place in. Yet she continues to threaten the health and safety of women in Virginia and across the country by allowing politicians to ban abortion in all cases, including rape and incest,” Congresswoman Luria said. “I will continue to live up to my oath, deliver for Coastal Virginians, and protect the rights of all Americans, including the right to choose.”
“Dr. Archer” features Dr. David Archer, an Obstetrician/Gynecologist with advanced certification in Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, who highlights Kiggans’ abortion extremism and her support for banning abortion.
Kiggans applauded the Supreme Court decision that overturned the right to choose for millions of women across the country and has said she is “100%, unapologetically pro-life.” She has claimed that ending access to abortion was her motivation to run for office, and she pledged to prioritize “the right to life.” Kiggans also supports allowing states to ban abortion without exceptions.
“Robert” highlights Congresswoman Luria’s husband, Robert Blondin, and the crucial role that military spouses in Coastal Virginia have in supporting their significant others and families as they serve our country. Robert retired at the rank of Commander after serving 27 years in the U.S. Navy and married Congresswoman Luria in Norfolk in 2005.
What absolute crap this is about ANYBODY “stealing” from women their supposed “right” to murder an unborn child.
Has Democrat WITCH HUNTER, demagogue and agent provacateur Elaine Luria ever read Roe v. Wade?
IF she had, she would know that Roe v. Wade NEVER guaranteed an unqualified right to an abortion on demand.
And more to the point, has she bothered to read Dobbs, State Health Officer of the Mississippi Department of Health, et al. v. Jackson’s Women’s Health Organization et al., No. 19–1392, decided June 24, 2022, or is she simply screeching to hear herself screech?
DOBBS REAFFIRMS DEMOCRACY, PLAIN AND SIMPLE:
Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the
people and their elected representatives.
Think about it, people – WHY DOES ELAINE LURIA HATE DEMOCRACY?
WHY DOES SHE HATE AMERICA AND ITS PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT DEMOCRATS?
What Dobbs does say about the DEMOCRACY Elaine Luria hates is this:
Roe and Casey each struck a particular balance between the interests of a woman who wants an abortion and the interests of what they termed “potential life.” Roe, 410 U. S., at 150; Casey, 505 U. S., at 852.
But the people of the various States may evaluate those interests differently.
The Nation’s historical understanding of ordered liberty does not prevent the people’s elected representatives from deciding how abortion should be regulated.
end quotes
THAT, people, is DEMOCRACY – the people’s elected representatives in their state deciding if and how abortion should be regulated, which is a far cry from saying abortions are now banned.
What hysterical horse**** that is, but it won’t stop the screechers like Elaine Luria screeching about it as she tries to score some cheap political points off of the hysteria she is intentionally provoking, just as she is provoking political violence with her inflammatory rhetoric as a PELOSI WITCH HUNTER.
IF before screeching, Elaine Luria had actually done what one would think a distinguished naval officer such as herself should have done, which is to know what one is actually talking about before engaging the mouth, she would know that the Dobbs Court said thusly about the supposed “UNQUALIFIED RIGHT” to abortion, to wit:
Attempts to justify abortion through appeals to a broader right to autonomy and to define one’s “concept of existence” prove too much. Casey, 505 U. S., at 851.
Those criteria, at a high level of generality, could license fundamental rights to illicit drug use, prostitution, and the like.
What sharply distinguishes the abortion right from the rights recognized in the cases on which Roe and Casey rely is something that both those decisions acknowledged: Abortion is different because it destroys what Roe termed “potential life” and what the law challenged in this case calls an “unborn human being.”
None of the other decisions cited by Roe and Casey involved the critical moral question posed by abortion.
Accordingly, those cases do not support the right to obtain an abortion, and the Court’s conclusion that the Constitution does not confer such a right does not undermine them in any way.
end quotes
But Democrats do not like the word “MORALITY,” do they, and so they see “moral” decisions being made by people “NOT LIKE THEM” as those moral people “stealing” something from them.
As to Roe being ANTI-DEMOCRACY, and why it was proper to overturn it as BAD LAW, the Dobbs Court went on to say as follows:
The nature of the Court’s error.
Like the infamous decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, Roe was also egregiously wrong and on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided.
Casey perpetuated its errors, calling both sides of the national controversy to resolve their debate, but in doing so, Casey necessarily declared a winning side.
Those on the losing side—those who sought to advance the State’s interest in fetal life — could no longer seek to persuade their elected representatives to adopt policies consistent with their views.
The Court short-circuited the democratic process by closing it to the large number of Americans who disagreed with Roe.
end quotes
And that is exactly why Elaine Luria and her fellow SCREECHING DEMOCRATS loved Roe – BECAUSE IT STRIPPED THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO DON’T AGREE WITH THEM OF THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS!
So think carefully, people, before November comes around and it is time for you to cast your vote.
DO YOU REALLY WANT TO BE REPRESENTED IN CONGRESS BY A HATE-FILLED IGNORANT DEMOCRAT WHO HATES DEMOCRACY FOR ANYONE NOT A DEMOCRAT?
Or is it time for someone different who is capable of actually engaging in rational thought and dialogue.
Your choice.
Absolutely correct, Paul!!
Wish I could have stated the facts about Ms. Luria this well. She’s a not-so-well disguised ultra-leftist, all about federal CONTROL November 8 marks our best chance to vote her out of office.
What we are seeing here in this screed of Ms. Luria’s is the art of demagoguery (spirit, method or conduct of a demagogue) honed to a perfection not seen in this country since the days of George Wallace and Orval Faubus who were both masters at the art.
And we are also getting a first-hand look at how very skillfully Elaine Luria is employing the Biden/Harris/Luria campaign strategy here as a potent political tool against her opponent, that strategy employing the following psychological devices, to wit:
* never allow the public to cool off;
* never admit a fault or wrong;
*never concede that there may be some good in your enemy;
* never leave room for alternatives;
* never accept blame;
* concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him/her for everything that goes wrong;
* people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one;
* and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
For proof of the expert use of those last two strategies by congresswoman Luria, especially, the skillful use of the BIDEN BIG LIE, look at this string of pure vitriol and invective flowing forth quite freely from the congresswoman’s poison pen as a vivid example, to wit:
The two ads highlight the Congresswoman’s commitment to delivering for the people of Coastal Virginia and the danger that Jen Kiggans poses to women across the Commonwealth and the country.
end quotes
BOOM DA DA BOOM DA DA BOOM!
DANGER, DANGER, DANGER, RED LIGHTS FLASHING!
Kiggins is going to steal the soul of America and hide it somewhere safe in Mar-A-Lago where Joe Biden won’t be able to find it.
Going back to the demagoguery, we have:
“The right to choose is a decision that politicians like Jen Kiggans and the government should have no place in.”
end quotes
And there we see congresswoman Luria trying to carve out a space where the congress of the United States of America is constitutionally forbidden to legislate, period, which is a form of government sponsored and protected anarchy, and as we have seen the BIG LIE here is that there is no “right” to choose guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, which will not stop demagogue Luria from swearing there is, despite her having no proof to back up her assertion that Jen Kiggins is a danger to women across the Commonwealth and the country, notwithstanding that in all likelihood, people outside of the Commonwealth don’t even know who Jen Kiggins is, nor do they care, since she has no power over anything outside of Virginia, which takes us back to this burst of spew from Ms. Luria, to wit:
Yet she continues to threaten the health and safety of women in Virginia and across the country by allowing politicians to ban abortion in all cases, including rape and incest.
end quotes
Jen Kiggins, a minor Virginia politician unknown outside her district, is allowing politicians to ban abortion in all cases, including rape and incest, and thereby, is threatening the health and safety of women in Virginia and across the country?
My goodness, do tell!
I guess she is a lot more politically powerful than we thought if she wields that kind of power over politicians all over the country outside of Virginia.
If congresswoman Luria had not of warned us like she did there, how would we have ever known?
But the vitriol does not stop there, nor will it until the night before the November mid-terms, as we see from the following:
Kiggans applauded the Supreme Court decision that overturned the right to choose for millions of women across the country and has said she is “100%, unapologetically pro-life.”
She has claimed that ending access to abortion was her motivation to run for office, and she pledged to prioritize “the right to life.”
Kiggans also supports allowing states to ban abortion without exceptions.
end quotes
So what does Elaine Luria support then?
An American industry that reaps big bucks from parting out aborted fetuses?
Perhaps before November, she can let us know.
Paul, Perfect analysis of Luria’s agenda. Perhaps she should be more appropriately referred to as LURID LURIA!
With respect to Ms. Luria, who was put into office by the people of Virgina and who now represents a clear and present danger to our nation and ourselves as a result, the Reader’s Digest Great Encyclopedic Dictionary defines the term “demgogic” as “pertaining to or like a demagogue; given to unprincipled political agitation,” which is what we are seeing in this obvious propaganda piece above us here where Congresswoman Luria tells us that her opponent Kiggans “applauded the Supreme Court decision that overturned the right to choose for millions of women across the country,” and “the right to choose is a decision that politicians like Jen Kiggans and the government should have no place in, yet she continues to threaten the health and safety of women in Virginia and across the country by allowing politicians to ban abortion in all cases, including rape and incest.”
That same dictionary then defines the “demagogue” as “one who leads the populace by appealing to prejudices and passions; an unprincipled politician.”
That label of “unprincipled politician” in this case fits congresswoman Luria to a tee, where she tells us that “the right to choose is a decision that the government should have no place in.”
Clearly, she has never bothered to actually read Roe v. Wade, or she would not be so easily caught out as she is here making such a stupid and uninformed statement about the government having no place in the supposed “right to choose,” which is not a right at all.
Here is what Roe v. Wade actually did say about this supposed “right to choose” way back in 1973, two full years before Elaine Luria was even born, as opposed to being aborted herself, to wit:
Though the State cannot override that right (right to a QUALIFIED ABORTION), it has legitimate interests in protecting both the pregnant woman’s health and the potentiality of human life, each of which interests grows and reaches a ‘compelling’ point at various stages of the woman’s approach to term.
(a) For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation MUST be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman’s attending physician.
(b) For the stage subsequent to approximately the end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, MAY, if it chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are REASONABLY RELATED to maternal health.
(c) For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, MAY, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.
4. The State may define the term ‘physician’ to mean only a physician currently licensed by the State, and may proscribe any abortion by a person who is not a physician as so defined.
end quotes
Those are not my words, those are the words of the United States Supreme Court itself in 1973, and very clearly, in 1973, the Supreme Court made it patently clear that the “state” or the “government” most certainly does have a place, and there is no “right to choose” that does not involves the “state’ AFTER the first trimester.
So the Republicans and the Dobbs Court have “stolen” nothing from these people backing abortions, because they had absolutely nothing to steal.
This so-called “right to choose” is something that the demagogue Luria made up out of whole cloth, but that is what demagogues do, so who can be surprised.
As to what the Dobbs Court had to say about this supposed “right to choose,” here are their words on the subject in Dobbs, to wit:
Next, the Court examines whether the right to obtain an abortion is rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition and whether it is an essential component of “ordered liberty.”
The Court finds that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in the Nation’s history and tradition.
The underlying theory on which Casey rested — that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause provides substantive, as well as procedural, protection for “liberty” — has long been controversial.
The Court’s decisions have held that the Due Process Clause protects two categories of substantive rights — those rights guaranteed by the first eight Amendments to the Constitution and those rights deemed fundamental that are not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.
In deciding whether a right falls into either of these categories, the question is whether the right is “deeply rooted in [our] history and tradition” and whether it is essential to this Nation’s “scheme of ordered liberty.”
The term “liberty” alone provides little guidance.
Thus, historical inquiries are essential whenever the Court is asked to recognize a new component of the “liberty” interest protected by the Due Process Clause.
In interpreting what is meant by “liberty,” the Court must guard against the natural human tendency to confuse what the Fourteenth Amendment protects with the Court’s own ardent views about the liberty that Americans should enjoy.
For this reason, the Court has been “reluctant” to recognize rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution.
Guided by the history and tradition that map the essential components of the Nation’s concept of ordered liberty, the Court finds the Fourteenth Amendment clearly does not protect the right to an abortion.
Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion.
No state constitutional provision had recognized such a right.
Until a few years before Roe, no federal or state court had recognized such a right.
Nor had any scholarly treatise.
Indeed, abortion had long been a crime in every single State.
At common law, abortion was criminal in at least some stages of pregnancy and was regarded as unlawful and could have very serious consequences at all stages.
American law followed the common law until a wave of statutory restrictions in the 1800s expanded criminal liability for abortions.
By the time the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted, three-quarters of the States had made abortion a crime at any stage of pregnancy.
This consensus endured until the day Roe was decided.
Roe either ignored or misstated this history, and Casey declined to reconsider Roe’s faulty historical analysis.
end quotes
That is quite a bit different from the horse**** the demagogue Luria is trying to feed us here as she makes her appeal to the prejudices and passions of her followers in the run-up to the November mid-terms where her job is now on the line.
DO YOU WANT AN UNPRINCIPLED POLITICIAN REPRESENTING YOUR INTERESTS IN THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES?
If yes, your choice is clear – VOTE LURIA!