Phony War On Women

I for one am tired of the Dems drumming up this phony “War on Women” in the leftist media. To listen to them you would think that the conservatives in this country treat women like livestock or something! It isn’t as if they regularly produce sexist hate-filled ads for campaigns. Do you see disgusting overweight rightwing scum criticizing the first lady for her weight? I think not! Do they tell women they should be put in their place? Do they attack women for being well qualified? Would even their women make wildly sexist comments? Don’t be ridiculous.

If they where sexist, you would think that they would notice it. After all they are in the business of influencing opinion. If they where sexist, they would be trying to figure out how to lie about it.

I mean do you have proof?

Update: I should have added the first time, this weeks Doonesbury is great (already saw a preview of it) and you really should turn in for the whole thing.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/archive/2012/03/12

  1. #1 by brewski on March 12, 2012 - 11:28 pm

    Evidence Evidence Evidence

    Calling your political opponents “whores” is better (Jerry Brown)

    Calling women you don’t like counts, twats and bitches is better? (Bill Maher)

    Making jokes about Down’s syndrome babies is funny? (Bill Maher)

    Calling women you don’t like a slut is ok? (Ed Schultz)

    So yes, it seems as though there is a War on Women, from the left.

  2. #2 by brewski on March 12, 2012 - 11:29 pm

    damn autospell

  3. #3 by cav on March 13, 2012 - 8:53 am

    Sister Romney,

    Sister Santorum,

    Sister Gingrich.

    All viable nominees.

  4. #4 by Shane on March 13, 2012 - 9:04 am

    Hey brewski, tell your mom thanks for the chicken soup.

  5. #5 by cav on March 13, 2012 - 9:14 am

    But why never war on Wall Street, the most corrupt, pathological, boorish, assholes imaginable?

    Why no culture war?

  6. #6 by Shane on March 13, 2012 - 9:20 am

    Ed points out that brewski is wrong. Again.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/?p=5259

    Which means brewski should be back any second too post “I win!”

  7. #7 by brewski on March 13, 2012 - 9:58 am

    Actually, no. That link does not prove me wrong at all.

    Yes, I win again.

  8. #8 by Richard Warnick on March 13, 2012 - 11:57 am

    In Ed Schultz’s case, there was accountability. Not excuses, which is all we get from Rush Limbaugh.

  9. #9 by cav on March 13, 2012 - 12:13 pm

    ding ding ding…we have a whiner!

  10. #10 by brewski on March 13, 2012 - 12:52 pm

    Richard,
    Yes, Ed Schultz did apologize. I commend him for it.
    Yes, Rush is a dickwad and I have said so many times and I have never listened to him.
    Yes, Maher is a bigger dickwad and I don’t listen to him either.

  11. #11 by Richard Warnick on March 13, 2012 - 1:07 pm

    Ed Schultz was taken off the air for a single offensive remark, as many other broadcasters have been. But not Limbaugh, he can say anything and get away with it. Remember he insulted Sandra Fluke (not a public figure, a student) 70 times on his show, inexplicably claiming that she was having “more sex than she could afford,” and wanted taxpayers to pay for it.

  12. #12 by brewski on March 13, 2012 - 1:33 pm

    I don’t know how Sandra Fluke is not a public figure. She is a long time activist and leader and has been seeking out this confrontation for years. She is 30 years old. Not a kid. She got her 15 minutes.

    I would like to see her “testify” under oath and answer questions from people not named Pelosi. My guess is that she would fold like a sheet.

    I will take your word for it as to what Rush says. You seem to be an expert on him.

  13. #13 by Richard Warnick on March 13, 2012 - 1:51 pm

    You can watch the video, courtesy of TPM.

  14. #14 by cav on March 13, 2012 - 1:52 pm

    I meant: why never a CLASS war?

    Seems we have to pick on the women, or those ‘softened by years of sanctions, little folks, and for why?

    What do we get?

  15. #15 by cav on March 13, 2012 - 1:56 pm

    …another tombstone in the graveyard of empires, a stinking mile-high pile of blue-penis- pills, and what?

    Not what I signed up for – that’s for sure.

  16. #16 by brewski on March 13, 2012 - 2:24 pm

    You spend a lot of time listening to Rush. I assume it is like watching a car crash, or watching Olbermann.

  17. #18 by Shane on March 13, 2012 - 5:15 pm

    Huh, imagine that…

    It is almost as if there was a war on women!

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/13/fired-for-using-birth-control-it-could-be-possible-in-arizona/

  18. #19 by Larry Bergan on March 13, 2012 - 9:15 pm

    This is a war on freedom itself. If they can stick a metallic wand in the most private place of the “weaker sex” they can do the same to a any urban cowboy including Scientologists and Mormons.

    Why do I always find myself painting ugly pictures?

    I love John Denver’s songs!

    Take me home!!!!!

  19. #20 by Shane on March 14, 2012 - 7:54 am

    One of the best single statements from the GOP/women haters club has been the justification for the invasive ultra-sound, which multiple GOP members defended with variations on the phrase “they already agreed to have something inside them when they had sex, so we can do it again now.”

    While it is true (as some have pointed out) that such flimsy reasoning also says that any non-virgin women thus agrees to be raped anytime any man near her feels like it, I don’t think that is the obvious conclusion. I think the obvious conclusion is that any man who has sex has agreed to have his penis inside something, therefore any women may decide to store it in a jar for him.

    On the plus side, this will cut down on the number of abortion tremendously. On the downside, removing the “dick” from the average GOP male will leave nothing but shoes, a tie, and some white male privillage.

  20. #21 by cav on March 14, 2012 - 8:49 am

    Tangential, but astounding:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/opinion/brooks-the-fertility-implosion.html?_r=1

    The speed of the change is breathtaking. A woman in Oman today has 5.6 fewer babies than a woman in Oman 30 years ago. Morocco, Syria and Saudi Arabia have seen fertility-rate declines of nearly 60 percent, and in Iran it’s more than 70 percent. These are among the fastest declines in recorded history.

  21. #22 by Shane on March 14, 2012 - 11:49 am

    That is shocking. I have been wondering for some time if the current issues in several countries (education and declining futures) would have a major population effect. It is hard to believe that the carrying capacity of the planet could be over 2 billion, yet we have over 7 billion. I wonder if within my life time we will see the population actually reverse. Current projections look like the growth rate will never slow, but 5.6 less children in just 30 years? If that happened in a few places we would make a big dent in those numbers pretty fast. Very interesting.

  22. #23 by cav on March 14, 2012 - 7:24 pm

    I read the other day about a ;geneticist speculating on the possibility of breeding up new generations of smaller peeps.

    Shrunken peeps in imploding numbers may just be parts of a hopeful future.

  23. #24 by cav on March 14, 2012 - 7:33 pm

    I forgot the ‘bigger is better, and biggest is best’ principle that so defined the dinosaurs, may they rest in peace, and still seems to have an abiding place in our culture. So, the above scenario may be nothing but a pipe dream.

  24. #25 by Shane on March 15, 2012 - 8:57 am

    Still epic, and actually getting better.

    http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/archive/2012/03/15

  25. #26 by Shane on March 16, 2012 - 7:40 am

    Thank god there is no war on women, or we might get stories like this one.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2012/03/a-triumph-for-the-texas-taliban/

    Because imagine how difficult it must be to look forward to your second child, only to find out that he is going to be born horribly deformed if he is able to live to term at all, then make the difficult choice to terminate that horribly deformed fetus you had hopes and dreams around, so that Texas could rape you and then describe the details to you.

    Clearly not a war on women.

    Oh and PS, here is a big middle finger to all the women who can’t afford healthcare during the 1% recovery. http://feeds.dailykos.com/~r/dailykos/index/~3/I2MZ7KdoGYM/-Texas-loses-Medicaid-funding-in-effort-to-spite-Planned-nbsp-Parenthood-

    But that totally isn’t a war a women!

  26. #27 by cav on March 16, 2012 - 8:08 am

    According to Aztec creation myth, the moon is but the severed head of the Suns aborted twin sister – thrown into the firmament to forever remind Mom of her beautiful daughter.

    Now we wouldn’t want there to be no moon in the sky, now would we.

  27. #28 by cav on March 16, 2012 - 9:37 am

    And as they keep nickling and diming each of the many ponderous wars, they’ll inevitably get to a point where we’re all insane, mindless stooges capable only of sweeping the floors of Wall Street.

    Oh, Happy Day!

  28. #29 by brewski on March 17, 2012 - 4:13 pm

    The opinions of a 61 year old woman on the issue of a war on women:
    http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=615

  29. #30 by cav on March 17, 2012 - 4:44 pm

    Why Peggy Noonan, flop-sweat shill for the Gop feels her voice is any more to be listened to than any other of the commenters she so disparages is a mystery to me. Seems her credentials come from promoting the most vile, lying and evil administration to gain a foothold in my lifetime.

    Sorry, no confidence.

  30. #31 by brewski on March 17, 2012 - 7:41 pm

    Thank you for defining ad hominem for me.

  31. #32 by cav on March 17, 2012 - 8:01 pm

    Anytime. She’s trying to take down Matt Taibbi – just another reason I find her uncommonly objectionable.

    (How was that? Homeminmummy – I gave it up for lent.)

  32. #33 by brewski on March 17, 2012 - 9:39 pm

    Taibbi is a troll.

  33. #34 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 12:57 am

    Talk about ad hominem…

    If you run into Peggy at the check out counter (which you won’t) she’ll look nothing at all like that sparkly picture she fronts with. But we’re to believe the lies she keyboards?

    Won’t be conned. I have my standards.

  34. #35 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 1:26 am

    Peggy Noonan is a slut!

    OH WAIT, I meant Dr. Laura. Hate it when I do that!

    Taibbi is a a troll with a name, but he is only allowed on the air because he strongly opposes truthers.

  35. #36 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 1:33 am

    Of course let’s not forget that Dr. Phil is a slut.

  36. #37 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 8:11 am

    Occupy brothels!

  37. #38 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 8:38 am

    Had to look up brothel; small R and D; Right?

    Not sure. :(

  38. #39 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 9:01 am

    The rape victims in ZUCCOTTI PARK weren’t victims so much as Dirty Fricken Hippy Sluts.

    I believe Peggy Noonan said that.

  39. #40 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 9:13 am

    Now ‘erectile disfunction’…God can empathize with.

  40. #41 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 9:33 am

    Wardrobe disfunction is the only thang we need to worry about; not actual metalic rape.

    Am I on the right track?

  41. #42 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 9:36 am

    God forbid, if I ever saw, or sucked on a teet.

  42. #43 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 10:17 am

    Am I on the right track?

    In the land of snark you’re spot on.

    And Teets…the nerve of those temptresses.

  43. #44 by Larry Bergan on March 18, 2012 - 10:45 am

    If I only could. I would.

  44. #45 by brewski on March 18, 2012 - 10:34 pm

    It is incredible that not one of you have offered anything other than name calling to Ms. Noonan. I guess you prove her point rather well, don’t you.

  45. #46 by cav on March 18, 2012 - 11:05 pm

    By not taking a propagandizing dolt seriously, we confirm the ‘correctness’ of her dribble?

    Right.

  46. #47 by brewski on March 19, 2012 - 7:29 am

    I guess that means we can not treat the propagandized dolts such as Maddow, Olbermann, Schultz, Klein, Matthews, etc seriously either.

  47. #48 by cav on March 19, 2012 - 8:15 am

    So we’ve turned off our televisions…Will our dishwasher be a better friend?

  48. #49 by cav on March 19, 2012 - 8:16 am

    Oh, and good morning.

  49. #50 by Shane on March 19, 2012 - 10:25 am

    A new Bloomberg poll has some very interesting results when people were asked their views on Rush Limbaugh and the role of contraception in political debate. The bottom line: Limbaugh is deeply unpopular and contraception has immense support.
    Americans overwhelmingly regard the debate over President Barack Obama’s policy on employer-provided contraceptive coverage as a matter of women’s health, not religious freedom, rejecting Republicans’ rationale for opposing the rule. More than three-quarters say the topic shouldn’t even be a part of the U.S. political debate.

    More than six in 10 respondents to a Bloomberg National Poll — including almost 70 percent of women — say the issue involves health care and access to birth control, according to the survey taken March 8-11…

    The results suggest the Republican candidates’ focus on contraception is out of sync with the U.S. public. Seventy-seven percent of poll respondents say birth control shouldn’t be a topic of the political debate, while 20 percent say it should…

    More than half of those interviewed also say radio host Rush Limbaugh, who called a female law student testifying publicly in favor of birth-control coverage a “slut” and “prostitute,” should be fired based solely on those comments.

    Interestingly, even 30% of Republicans said Rush should be fired over it. It’s clear that both Limbaugh and Santorum are appealing to a very narrow group with their attacks on contraception and on women who use it.

    Just sayin.

(will not be published)


%d bloggers like this: