That often seems to be the case, but not according to Slate’s Matt Yglesias, who tweeted a link to an article at Slate entitled “The GOP’s Strange Obsession With the War on Women”:
The GOP’s pathetic efforts to turn Weiner’s Weiner into a rebuttal to the “war on women”: http://t.co/zrEmLPnEYk
— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) July 26, 2013
A Democrat “war on women”? How dare Republicans infringe on Dem copyright! Apologies all around. Weiner’s a great guy and the ladies dig him:
.@mattyglesias You're right. He's kind to women. He's just the best guy ever. A good liberal man. Someone to emulate. Gooooo Weiner!
— Melissa Clouthier (@MelissaTweets) July 26, 2013
The article in question separates legislative “wars on women” (i.e. outlawing late term abortion, though this specific goes unmentioned, perhaps for a reason we’ll get to in a second) with personal “wars on women” (i.e. Weiner junk tweets and Filner’s impromptu involuntary hug therapy seminars) and for the most part assigns the former to the GOP and the latter to Democrats.
The takeaway is supposed to be that Republican “war on women” affects a “wide swath” of women through their alleged “anti-women” legislation, and the behavior of individuals like Anthony Weiner and Bob Menendez, while an affront to the females involved, don’t affect women in great numbers and the GOP should just knock of trying to copycat “war on women.” The Republican rebuttal could be a simple one: There is a Democrat “war on women” through policy, and one need only count how many of babies aborted in the U.S. every year are female to come to that realization.