Boehner: What ‘war on women’?

>>> narrowly passed the student loan bill. but the white house is threatening a veto because republicans want to pay for the bill by cutting women 's health care provisions. today, house speaker john boehner got rather animated over what he said was a manufactured controversy. let's have a listen.

>> now we're going to have a fight over women 's health. give me a break. this is the latest plank in the so-called war on women . entirely created, entirely created by my colleagues across the aisle for political gain.

>> if there is no war on women , why does romney want to defund planned parenthood ? why is this attempt from taking funding from women 's health care in order to cover the costs of keeping interest rates low on student loans ?

>> there is definitely a war on women and being being hit from the land, the sea and the air. we're big hit by the dirt of the old-fashioned notions of what is conception rights for women . reproductive rights them try to drown out our disenor complaints. mostly they are dropping bombs from the right wing constituency base that women don't want to be educated well or how women are overtalking one another or this is not in existence, which is not true. last night i was at the woodrow wilson foundation and hillary clinton had to echo something 17 years later that she did in beijing, china. that human ? rights are women 's rights and women 's rights are human rights . if she has to say that again 17 years later, then we know that the battle is not yet ended. and also, for them to try to the herring of women , the student bill knowing the president would veto it. i think is really disingenuous of hill. he won't shed a tear for the women or the youth with you tear into the fabrics of their life by trying to put in the women 's health along with student loans is disingenuous.

>> marcia makes the point that the president may veto the student loan bill because republicans insist on paying for it with cutting women 's health care . exactly which voters do you think the gop is appealing to with that?

>> well, that's a good rhetorical question. i think there are two points. i don't know. i don't know what the operative political theory is here. there are two points. when you start complaining about the terms of the debate as being unfair. i.e., the war on women . you have effectively lost the debate at that point. and i think that is true in this case with the republicans. secondly, when you have a 17 to 20-point deficit with women voters, the last thing you want to do. whether you think this issue is being portrayed fairly or unfairly. the last thing you want to do is give them red meat . the fact that they gave this provision where they'll pay for student lobes by going after things like screening of breast cancer , screening of cervical cancer , tells you it is the key stone cops in charge of the house which is great news for democrats. this is political ineptitude.

>> final ?thoughts?

>> i don't think there is an intentional war against women . i don't think there is any animosity here but there does seem to be a bizarre prioritizing going on for a party that does face a big gender gap . i'm not sure how they expect to combat that line with moves like this.

>> thank you so much. have a great weekend, all of you.