Tag Archives: Obama

The Democrat War On Women

Ann Romney
Ann Romney (Photo credit: katherinecresto)

As is evident this election cycle, Democrats have several operational assumptions regarding women which are offensive, degrading, and create victims of women, rather than empowering them.

Exhibit A: Lena Dunham’s ad for the Obama campaign. The idea that voting for Barack Obama, sexual maturity, and identification as a “real woman” are somehow correlated.

The problem with making everything all about sex is that you don’t know when to stop. (From BreakPoint)

Exhibit B: The idea that women can only be militant extremist feminists and have their possible acceptable lifestyle choices limited in order to be true women.

It was nothing if not audacious. Second wave feminists passed withering judgments on any woman who dared to live her life as she saw fit. They despised and shunned women who refused to sacrifice their lives to the feminist cause.

This one is particularly vicious and has been going on a lot longer than just since The One was crowned. It’s odd that the Philanderer in Chief and Sandra Fluke’s Sugar Daddy are the lefts ideal men. They aren’t even enablers, these two are victimizers of woman, taking what they can to ensure their own satisfaction, be it political or otherwise.

Yes, a little bit of my outrage over this particular point is that I see my own mother’s life choices and those of my wife questioned in the same questioning of Ann Romney and other women who choose of their own free will to live at home and devote their entire lives to making a home and raising children. It is not the only great and noble endeavor a woman may have, but it is certainly one they may choose.

Isn’t the crux of true feminism “be all you desire”? Isn’t that what we want for our daughters and mothers and wives and sisters? The ideology that says that a woman may be anything she chooses except X is an ideology that seeks to limit women, not empower them. When a woman is forbidden to choose a particular course of life simply because it isn’t approved by the current guardians of our culture, that woman is made a victim. Despite what some people want to think, nobody on the right side of the aisle wants to prevent a woman from succeeding in business, in industry, in the office, and on top of that, we allow women the freedom to choose to be whatever they desire, even if that desire is to be a home maker. And shame upon those who tell women they cannot do that.

English: Michelle Obama and Barack Obama enjoy...
English: Michelle Obama and Barack Obama enjoy a fist pound at the New Hampshire primary speech. Cropped and Auto-Leveled with Paint.NET v3.5.6. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Exhibit C: Fear-mongering over the possible outcomes of this election.

The Center for American Progress has an extensive article detailing how they believe Romney will be bad for women. Among their claims are the ideas that Romney would “erode access to contraception and threaten its legality”, and “would deny women paid sick days and family and medical leave”. You can watch videos videos of supporters at Obama rallies claiming that Romney would return women’s rights to 1512. And then there’s the hugely broadcast line from the 2nd debate where we learned that Romney has binders full of women.

I suppose if you repeat a lie often enough, enough people start to believe it’s the truth. And the various lies regarding Republicans, Romney, and the Right in general regarding women have certainly been repeated ad nauseum, especially of late in these increasingly desperate-sounding and waning days of the Obama presidency. No Republican will stand in the way of a woman seeking contraception. What we will also will not do is assume that you need the help of the government to choose a contraceptive or purchase it. Most of them are available the counter and don’t cost very much. And instead of assuming women need their hands held through this process, Republicans generally assume women are quite capable of taking care of themselves with this and other issues regarding their reproductive health. In the MRCTV video linked above, at least the woman who claims women’s rights would go back to 1512 recognized she wouldn’t lose the right to vote. But then I’d ask her: What will you actually lose? It’s one thing to make a wild and highly inflammatory comment such as this flippantly, it’s quite another to have facts and figures the back up your claims. And regarding Romney’s binders full of women, the outrage over this line came from the party of Clinton and Kennedy, and as some noted, the women in Romney’s binders were being considered for C-level positions in a significant State, as opposed to Obama’s Julia and all the millions of women on the unemployment roles in President Obama’s America.

The War on Women is a crass and manufactured attempt to keep people in line and voting for the left’s morally, intellectually, and economically bankrupt positions in spite of their own true best interests.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Why Romney Must Win By A Landslide

Romney
Romney (Photo credit: Talk Radio News Service)

If Romney wins, which seems increasingly likely, he must win by a landslide for the security of our nation.

More and more today people believe that the majority of the population agree with them. Call it part of our human capability of rationalization, blame the media echo chambers and liberal bastions of big cities where people can go their whole lives without meeting a single person they disagree with substantively. Whatever the cause, people, especially people on the left or supporting the left, think that they are a significant majority, and that people who don’t think the way they do are backward, ignorant, abusive, small, mean, vulgar, cave men, knuckle dragging, pea-brained, idiots, etc.

Recent polls indicate Romney is ahead by a slim but significant margin, but they also indicate that huge percentages of Obama supporters are absolutely convinced their candidate will win. It’s one thing to be confident, it’s another to be confident in the face of increasing evidence otherwise.

Or perhaps that’s the problem: They aren’t seeing any evidence otherwise because they tend to get their news from sources they agree with (Fox News? Fox News? Fox News?). They don’t know anybody personally who plans to vote for Romney. They never see them on TV except when there’s something odd or stupid to be said about them. There is nothing that intrudes into their consciousness which gives them any inkling of the level of support for Romney or the level antipathy and discontent there is with President Obama.

This spells a bit of trouble.

If you were absolutely convinced your candidate was going to win, and everybody you knew was planning on voting for him, and all you heard on the news and in papers and any other sources of information and infotainment was the idiocy of the challengers supporters and the ubiquity of your own candidates supporters, and then you watched the election returns come in and you saw your candidate lose, there would be hell to pay.

Fraud! You’d charge. You’d take to the streets. The Occupy movement and the Tea Party would be nothing compared to your outrage and that of your friends and neighbors and everybody else who voted for your candidate.

This is why, when Romney wins, he must win by a landslide. It is not enough to say “I’m in a safe state, I’ll stay home because he’s already got our electoral college votes“. No, each and every person must and should vote because, if the election is anything but a landslide, even a victory for Romney will be a hollow one.

The first steps towards undoing the dissension and division the Great Uniter has foisted upon us will have to include those who thought he was the messiah recognizing they are not an insurmountable majority. They’ll have to recognize first that people exist who disagree with them, and then that those people are reasonable people with reasonable goals and reasonable reasons for having supported someone besides their beloved. Only once they realize the world is populated with all kinds of people will they begin to be able to accept they may not have a monopoly on common sense.

Enhanced by Zemanta

What Obama Thinks About Women

President Obama’s campaign saw fit to release this ad yesterday, and I’m still trying to figure out why. I don’t like assuming the worst about people, but it seems to me that in this case, the worst may be the most accurate.

A woman who thinks that voting for anybody validates her as a woman is a woman with a small view of herself. A woman who thinks that voting for a specific person as the only reasonable course because of her gender is a woman with a small view of womanhood.

As a man I cannot pretend to understand womanhood. As a married man I’ve been mostly disabused of any notion that I might come even close. But if my wife came to me and told me she had to vote for Romney in order to validate herself as a woman, she and I would have a deep discussion about what she thinks it means to be a woman.

Heck, if an ad was released showing a woman claiming that a vote for Romney was the only thing a woman could reasonable do and still call herself a woman, leaving out all the stuff about the “first time” and other sexual innuendo, there would be hell to pay whether it was released by the Romney campaign or simply some over-enthused supporter.

In short, I hope Lena comes to recognize her value and validity as a person stem from the fact she is a person, and that her value and validity as a woman stem from the fact that she is a woman, and that neither of those have anything whatsoever to do with whose name she punches on the voting card every four years.

UPDATE:

Instapundit says this ad echoes one from the leader of our greatest geo-political competitor.

Enhanced by Zemanta

To Summarize Mr. President

Obama
Obama (Photo credit: NatalieMaynor)

R. Emmet Tyrell, writing in the Washington Times, argues President Obama’s campaign is going for the moron vote. I’m not sure I’d use that word, but I certainly recognize there seem to be more people who are willing to assume the worst regarding anybody who disagrees with them, and who are willing to say so publicly and to act upon that assumption, and it certainly seems that’s who the President is hoping will vote for him.

Let us come to the point. Mr. Obama is reaching out to his very own special constituency. It is composed of those who believe that the Republicans would put up as their candidate for the presidency a person who in his business life would engage in fraud, tax evasion and even murder. Mr. Obama is casting his net for the moron vote. I do not believe there are enough morons out there to re-elect him.

From Obama’s Looking For The Moron Vote.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Executive Privilege Why?

President Barack Obama listens as Vice Preside...
President Barack Obama listens as Vice President Joe Biden (left) presents the report on the Roadmap to Recovery as he meets with his Cabinet in the State Dining Room of the White House, Monday, June 8, 2009. Looking on at right are Attorney General Eric Holder and Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The President of the United has invoked Executive Privilege to prevent release of documents regarding the Fast and Furious scandal. Executive Privilege is generally used to protect documents and records involved directly in the programs and issues of the President, not the Attorney General or the Justice Department. It’s Executive Privilege, not AG Privilege. Which then begs the question:

Why?

After all, it’s been Attorney General Eric Holder, presiding over what has arguably become the most partisan and unjust Justice Department we’ve seen in a long time, who is in the hot seat with Congress breathing down his neck over the gun-running Fast and Furious program which ended up killing at least one Border Patrol and likely countless Mexican civilians, all in the name of giving the gun lobby a bad name, which attempt blew up in the anti-gun Justice Department’s face, and purportedly to track criminal and drug running gangs in Mexico, which attempt also blew up in American Law Enforcement’s face. They’re 0 for 2 so far. So if Eric Holder is the one Congress is after, trying to get him to tell them who knew what and when they knew it, why is President Obama wading into this, getting close to the political and judicial mud pile, and putting his name and that of his Presidency on the line by invoking Executive Privilege to prevent the turning over of documents by the Justice Department to Congressional investigators regarding this program?

There are a few reasons I can think of, but there’s no telling which of them, if any, are more accurate.

  • The obvious one that’ll spring to most people’s minds is that proof of knowledge of the program extends beyond Eric Holder, and that President Obama himself, probably hoping to score another Law and Order PR coup, knew about and possibly even explicitly authorized the Fast and Furious program and is now afraid that he’d burn along with Holder should the documents come out?
  • A less obvious but still possible reason is that Valerie Jarret, who has long been suspected of being Attorney General Eric Holder’s biggest fan and supporter in the White House, has cajoled/demanded/begged/manipulated the President into invoking Executive Privilege simply to protect her most favorite man in D.C., tying the President to the sinking ship of Fast and Furious to protect Mr. Holder. Is Ms. Jarret willing to sacrifice the Presidency to protect the Attorney General?

I have no facts or basis for any of these theories, they are entirely my own wild speculation.

Enhanced by Zemanta