May 20, 2012
A few weeks ago, most of us heard about Julia, a composite character created by the campaign of our composite president (the man is something of a political chameleon, being anything at any time as long as his handlers think it can get a block of votes). Julia’s purpose was to illustrate the benefits of big government inserted into the major stages a woman’s life. Of course, the campaign had to assume that women, or at least those who might be influenced by Julia, are stupid.
Being a composite Obama supporter, one could assume that Julia is “pro-choice.” One could also assume, from reading about Julia, that she never married. No marriage was mentioned in her story, but this could be because marriage does not in itself create the apparent need for big government intervention. Best that Julia keep her options open in today’s squalid society. (Or as a Misfit Politics video tells it, Julia may want to enjoy a same-sex marriage in our brave new world.)
At the age of 31: Read the rest of this entry »
March 11, 2012
Whether it is the media, operatives pushing “moderate” candidates, or liberal Democrats (wait, I already mentioned the media) helping their own, “women and independents are sure getting a bad rap. On one hand, the two groups are built up as critical voting blocks to which appeals must be made if one wishes electoral success. On the other hand, they are portrayed as immoral, foolish voters who seek diminished liberty and abolition of individual responsibility. It is a shame that what seems to be an overwhelming majority of those with a platform have been able to paint “women and independents” in such an unflattering manner.
I realize that it is necessary for political actors to create groups, formulate polls, and fabricate narratives in the interest of their candidates or causes. Are “women” a voting block? Are “independents” all of like mind? If so, how the hell are they “independent?” Can women also be independent and if they are, does that mean that all women and all independents are expected to vote the same way? Stupid question, you say? I agree, but then again, I am not the one pretending that “women and independents” are the way they are being portrayed.
Given the recent shaping of the news to deflect critical examination of President Obama’s successes (not failures, as evidenced by his disdain for his country), “women and independents” are taking center stage. What is so bad about the presentation of these all-important deciders of the future? Read the rest of this entry »
January 29, 2012
If I am a person, I must be a threat to Planned Parenthood's profits.
There is a serious threat to the Trojans! Not to mention the Durexes, Lifestyles, and the rest of the products available at condomman.com! What can it be, that could wipe out not only the condom market, but the entire birth control industry in one fell swoop? What has the power to exert such a forceful blow to the business of pregnancy prevention? Is it a pending natural disaster? Could it be that all the water supplies on Earth will be contaminated with Salt Peter?
What weapon has the capacity to destroy the birth control pill factories and alter the sexual behavior of human beings? It is the most dastardly, the most heinous… it is the Personhood Initiative! Aarghhh! Run for your (sex) lives!
Who knew the sweeping ramifications of legally recognizing the unborn as persons? If personhood movements are successful, one might never again be able to legally practice “common forms of birth control.” Ridiculous, you say? Not if you are the ” advocacy / political arm of Planned Parenthood Federation of America” and you grasp for straws against any measure that may threaten your lucrative abortion mill bonanza! Read the rest of this entry »