Time to call out the Fauxminists and Democrats for McCain
This is what I would do if I had several thousand dollars to spare these days :
1. I would have wire clothes hangers, like the ones dry cleaning stores us, and I'd covered them in dark blue rice paper with the blue and logo of the McCain campaign.
2. The tag line under the logo? "I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned."
3. A second design option would have his fateful words about how he would change the Supreme Court of the United States with the judges like like Roberts and Alito or his dear friend Chief Rhenquist.
4. If I had more money, I'd hang a Supreme Court Justice looking robe from several hundreds of them and deliver them to each and every one of the high-profile Democrats, whereas politicians or funders, who are being assholes about supporting Obama.
Plain and simple message : You support McCain? Kiss equal rights for women away.
I say this because there's a "Unity" rally between the Obama and Clinton camps happening right now in New Hampshire. Mark Ambider has already reported about how there's a group called "Democrats for McCain" who will be attending the meeting.
Ambinder and others have already also reported how a meeting called by Senator Clinton in Washington DC between her high rollers and Obama had some of them grousing about not feeling it for the candidate. And now Washington Post has an article where they talk about the so-called "Pumas" who are saying "no to Obama" and have a douchette by the name of Diane Mantouvalos as their leader :
Diane Mantouvalos is an anger-shaker. The night before Clinton announced the suspension of her campaign, Mantouvalos was at home in Miami checking posts on her blog and sensing a mood that went beyond disillusionment, beyond sadness, beyond "I'm upset and bummed out." As co-creator of Hireheels.com, which describes itself as "a forum of power chics for Hillary," Mantouvalos hangs out on the sassy edge of the blogosphere. Feeling more empowered than embittered, the public relations consultant wondered: "Wouldn't it be great if we could thread all of these disparate factions and form one coalition?" A brassy coalition of rebels.
On June 8, the evening after Clinton conceded the Democratic presidential contest to Barack Obama, Mantouvalos organized a conference call with some 40 bloggers, political activists and other hardened loyalists of the New York senator's, in what became "a jam session of very intense opinion" -- about the party, its leadership, its presumptive nominee, the media. Five hours later, Mantouvalos, age "north of 35," had built a new Web site, JustSayNoDeal.com, which has become a clearinghouse for the renegade forces that are now confounding Democratic Party officials and Obama campaign operatives.
It doesn't stop at Diane. No, that would be too sensible. We also have Christi Adkins, co-founder of Clintons4McCain.com :
"I think he is dangerous. I think he is unvetted and unqualified," said Adkins, an independent who said she voted for Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in 2004 and Al Gore in 2000. She is the kind of woman McCain and the GOP are targeting. Former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina has been a point person in this effort, recently holding sessions with women in Ohio and Pennsylvania.
And Robin Murray as well:
Their goal was to stop Hillary Clinton by any means necessary," said Robin Murray, an Indianapolis therapist and social worker whose nine-minute YouTube video, " Mad as Hell/Bitch," detailed examples of sexism in the campaign and became a visual anthem for many feminists.
Given that she is a supporter of abortion rights and holds other beliefs that are at odds with McCain's, Murray was asked why she would consider voting against her own interests. "Whether it's appropriate or whether it will work doesn't matter at this time," she said. "The vote is a protest vote -- be it if I vote for McCain, if I don't show up, or if I write in Hillary's name." Added Murray: "I view it in a holistic way. It says, we will not be controlled and manipulated by these singular issues in order to cast a vote that we feel is deceitful, negative, there is just no pretty way to say it -- they cheated."
Really? I have two words for Diane, Cristi, Robin and their ilk : Fuck you.
I'm tired of these fauxminist women who think they can get away with this white woman anger bullshit. You think Obama cheated or that he is dangerous? Then let me show you graphically the dire consequences of your arrogance.
Actually, my first idea for this hanger is this one:
As you can see, not only was I willing to make this about Clinton supporters, I would have doused every single hanger in fake blood, just to make the point even more graphic. Yet I've decided to not go there and make this about all women, regardless of party, voting against not just their interests and for reproductive slavery.
So to all you so-called angry fauxminists who are too blind to have seen how horrendously mismanaged was Senator Clinton's presidential campaign, shut the fuck up. If you can't even give the woman the dignity of having been the commander in chief of her own campaign, if you are so stupid you don't understand the actual management and political dynamics that led to her failed bid, then look at that hanger as the symbol of your lost reproductive rights and therefore EQUALITY under the law.
And to the real feminists, prepare for the real war because the real misogynists happen to carry vaginas like you and me.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
Abortion | Equality | Health | misogyny | Racism | Reproductive Rights | Sex | Women | 2008 Presidential Elections | Barack Obama | Hillary Clinton | John McCain
Cantor '08: the South's Best Hope?
Submitted by Lynn Britt Barco (not verified) on 11 July 2008 - 8:47am.
Today the Republican Party sits in complete disarray, split between the pure secularism of the Neoconservatives and the latent anti-Semitism of the Religious Right. Is there a figure who can weave together these disparate tendencies for electoral triumph in '08? I submit there is ... I submit that Rep. Eric Cantor of Richmond is that very man ... and the *clear* choice for running-mate on the McCain ticket. His youth alone is enough to cause the Obama enthusiasts to shake in their Birkenstocks.
The loss of the South during the American Civil War is instructive with regard to the Middle East today. As the inspired anti-Stalinist Leon Trotsky stated long ago, a truly successful revolution myst be GLOBAL in scope ... and surrender is not an option.
COWARDICE IN HIGH PLACES
Consider the cave-in by advertisers and network executives over on-air remarks by Don Imus. In the Spring of 2002, James S. Hans said as much about "poet" Maya Angelou and no one batted an eye. Why? Because it was mere months after 9/11 when Americans still shared a sharper sense of priorities, back when America knew who the *real* enemy was (Palestinians, al-Qaeda, ad nauseam). Unlike most of the flavor-of-the-month club (read Obama, Obama, Obama), the Honorable Eric Cantor hasn't forgotten.
On the race issue in general, the positions of the highest exemplars of Hebrew-Americana (the late Irving Howe and CUNY Professor Michael E. Levin) aren't that far apart. It is folly to disregard differences in nature within the human species. No one with an elementary background in biology would deny the Negro's basic humanity, but those of us who, historically, have tried to help are treated increasingly to base ingratitude. Instead of "thank you," we are taunted instead with cries of "bloodsucker." Do we deny the Black Man's contribution to culture? Heavens, no ... but many of their most towering figures are either old or in the grave: Ornette Coleman was then, John Zorn is *now*.
THE EXAMPLE OF REAGAN
Political scientists agree that it was Ronald Reagan in 1980 who broke, once and for all, the Democratic Party's hold on the South. And it's no coincidence that Reagan was a great and dear friend to the Jewish people, appointing Elliott Abrams, a man who continues to serve this nation with honor. But that was nearly 30 years ago and the South longs for a native son on the national ticket with both unassailable conservative principals and a blood connection to Ancient Israel. Southerners and Judaics are, after all, a right and natural fit given our shared Old Testament values. And the symbolic value of Richmond, the city Eric Cantor proudly calls home, is not without significance:
"When the Civil War came, most Jewish families sent their sons to serve proudly in the Confederate Army. As the human costs of the war escalated, a section in Hebrew Cemetery on Shockoe Hill became the last resting place for many soldiers. They lie in the only known Jewish military cemetery outside Israel. The very unusual cast-iron cemetery fence was designed by Richmond artist William B. Myers and for years after the war the Hebrew Ladies Memorial Association decorated the graves of the fallen each May in a well-attended and moving ceremony."
The Jews have survived thousands of years of pain and invective, far beyond that of any Native American, Armenian or West African. Who has endured the hatred inspired by the notorious forgery known as The Protocals? Who continues to suffer the slings and arrows of the hoax circulating in many Christian Bibles as Revelation 3:9? They call us "Scythian," "Khazar" and every other infamy they can lay their imaginations upon, all without a shred of evidence. It is high time we had a standard bearer on the national ticket - someone less wishy-washy than the unreliable Joe Lieberman - a man unafraid to declare - in his bearing, if not in word - that the Ashkenazim are every bit as legitimate as the 25,000 Jews living in Iran, a nation that, officially, worships the G-d of Abraham, but - in fact - prays to the moon rock enshrined in Mecca.
In short, this is the time to let Candidate McCain know how you feel about Eric Cantor. McCain may have several paths to the White House, but Cantor represents the most reliably CONSERVATIVE one. Help keep the South solid by supporting a ticket that will work to protect and maintain our Judeo-Christian values and institutions, the very BEDROCK of our nation.
thank you,
Lynn Barco
former volunteer coordinator
The Museum of the Confederacy
Ahem...
Submitted by mole333 on 11 July 2008 - 8:51pm.
Well, while I find Cantor an interesting choice for McCain, it may not send the right message. After all, here are the top Cantor supporters:
Real Estate: $208,047
Insurance: $168,665
Securities & Investment: $145,150
Lawyers/Law Firms: $135,750
Real Estate, Insurance, Financial firms and Lawyers are Cantor's power base. Meanwhile he gets lousy ratings from groups like Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, United Autoworkers, League of Conservation Voters, etc. Pro-lawyer/pro-Insurance company but anti-labor/anti-Veterans may not be the image McCain wants.
As to the Confederacy, please. I may have been born in Arkansas, but I would have been the party of Lincoln in those days. The Confederacy explicitly had slavery as its primary focus. Contrary to the claim of states rights, the states that later seceded opposed states rights when states wanted to refuse to outlaw slavery.
Furthermore, when iit came to writing a Constitution, the Confederacy specifically wrote in slavery:
"No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed..."
Blacks as property was WRITTEN INTO the Confederate Constitution. And the Confederate Vice President explicitly stated that one of the fundamental reasons for secession was slavery and the inequality of blacks:
But not to be tedious in enumerating the numerous changes for the better, allow me to allude to one other —though last, not least. The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists amongst us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind—from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics. Their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the negro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just—but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.
This was the explicit justification of secession and an explicit difference the Confederate leaders had with none other than Thomas Jefferson, who disliked slavery, though a slaveowner himself, and who believed slavery would die out.
Many who fought for the South, from most common soldiers all the way up to Robert E. Lee, fought for what they saw was honorable and they did so honorably. But the foundation of the Confederacy was racism and slavery and this should be admitted and condemned even by those who were proud of the honor showed by the best the South had.
And may I just say, one of my earliest ancestors to set foot in the United States of America homesteaded in Iowa...and fought with the Union forces from that state. I am proud that my earliest American ancestor fought for the preservation of the Union and the abolishment of slavery as much as I am pround of the many second and third generation Americans in my family who fought proudly for America in World War Two. This is not because I doubt the honor of many who fought for the Confederacy, but because I find the racist and slave holding foundation of the Confederacy to be personally abhorant to both my Lutheran AND my Jewish heritage.
You are making this a button
so I can snag it for my sidebar...right? right?