Tag Archives: DNC Convention

Obama’s Inner Circle and the ‘War on Women’

OB8248707540_381d294d01_oOriginally posted at American Thinker blog

The White House releases tons of pictures of Obama family dog Bo; pictures of Michelle Obama gardening and hula-hooping; there are even photos of President Obama teaching the Resolute Desk how to do double duty as an ottoman. What there aren’t a lot of photographs of are America’s top general in the “war on women,” Barack Obama, and his underrepresented high-ranking female advisers.  Why?  Because besides the president’s Senior Advisor and admitted ‘main man’ Valerie Jarrett, there simply aren’t very many women around.

So what does this say about Barack Obama and the left’s contrived “war on women?”  Well, given the fact that high-level women are a scarcity at the White House and Obama pays his female staffers about 18% less than his male staffers, the definition of the “war on women” obviously has nothing to do with political or economic equal rights.  Instead, if Sandra Fluke and her Polycystic Ovary Syndrome sisters are the chosen poster girls for female oppression, then apparently outfitting women for carefree sex is how liberals plan to win the gender conflict.

After all, didn’t Democrats haul Sandra Fluke out in front of the House Democratic Steering and Policy Committee on women’s health and contraception to expound upon American women’s need for free birth control? That right there should have insulted liberated ladies who for years have tried to separate sex from significance.  But then again, if Obama consistently pays his female staffers $11K less than the males, it’s understandable that the president might feel that working women could be a little pressed for cash to purchase the necessary protection for after-work dalliances.

Georgetown University Law School graduate Sandra Fluke became a media star when Rush Limbaugh connected the dots for America.  Rush merely pointed out that demanding health insurance provide free birth control in order to facilitate consequence-free sex presents an opportunity for women to employ government entitlements as a means to earn extra cash.

The left was apoplectic that Limbaugh dared to suggest that Sandra Fluke may actually be what she herself had intimated she might be – so much so that the President took the time to call Sandy F. to “express his disappointment that she has been the subject of inappropriate personal attacks.”  As a parent, Obama mentioned that Sandra’s parents, Richard and Betty should be proud of their daughter’s willingness to “exercise her rights as a citizen to speak out on an issue of public policy.”

Let’s remember that when casually discussing birth control, abortion, and his own twisted sense of morality, it was the president who mentioned that Sasha and Malia should not be “punished” with a baby.  That bizarre comment coming from a father of two young girls indicates that career choices and potential income are not the first and foremost opportunities Obama anticipates will face his daughters.

Nevertheless, it was during Obama’s reelection campaign that Ms. Fluke’s dog-and-filly show took to the road.  The “democrat darling” traveled the nation representing victimized womenfolk and portrayed Republicans as Neanderthals trying to deprive the fairer sex of the necessary accoutrements for a healthy sex life. But the accolades didn’t stop there; Sandra also earned a slot as a featured speaker at the Democratic National Convention and TIME Magazine even considered Her Flukeness for Person of the Year.

Meanwhile, as Sandra was busily helping secure Obama’s reelection with the hyper-dependent Julias of the world, female employees working on Obama’s reelection campaign were earning an “average of $6,872…compared with an average of $7,235 for male employees. That is a difference of $363, or 5.3 percent.”

Then, recently, a White House Flicker photo was released of a meeting of Barack Obama’s top advisers.  The picture was void of even one female representative, so either the president’s top-level ladies were busy using those free contraceptives, or women are not welcome in the president’s innermost circle.

Couple the missing female Obama advisers with the president’s female staffers and campaign employees being paid considerably less than males and there’s a clear indication that the liberal “war on women” fiction involves something besides addressing traditional feminist issues.

Therefore, based on the lack of female representation and continued salary inequity in the Obama administration, as well as the emphasis in the “war on women” being on the “right” to a paternalistic birth control entitlement, it appears liberals believe women are reliant on men to protect their right to be ready for sex at a moment’s notice. It also explains why, on behalf of American women, liberal men like Barack Obama will keep fighting the good fight against conservatives who continue to insist that honoring a woman isn’t about equipping her for worry-free sex at taxpayer expense.

No uncredentialed children on the Democratic convention floor

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

Liberal women are funny.  Not in a weird way; in a funny ha-ha way.  Why? Because the Democratic National Committee is sponsoring a convention in Charlotte, N.C. and the same females who applaud the Democrat stand on abortion are now up in arms because organizers are banning children from the pro-choice festivities.

The Charlotte Observer reports that “children will not be allowed access on the floor of the Democratic National Convention,” and that “daycare will not be provided for delegates who bring their kids.”

Do liberal women need to be reminded that the Democratic Party isn’t exactly a child-friendly entity? This is a group of people whose greatest success over the last three decades is managing to promote and assist in the destruction in 60 million tiny human beings.

Hearing pro-choice women’s rights activist Gloria Steinem and a handful of abortion-loving NOW chapters accuse the DNC of “discrimination against mothers with young children” is downright confusing.

Gloria Steinem is the woman who coined the term “reproductive freedom.” Now she’s saying that “Women are the key to a Democratic victory, and sometimes, children are the key to women.” In order to maintain her “reproductive freedom” credibility, Ms. Steinem was careful to insert the word “sometimes.”

Nevertheless, the question that needs to be answered at this late date is: Why is Gloria Steinem suggesting that something besides free contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion is the key to wooing women and ensuring a Democrat victory?

Whatever the answer, Gloria believes “It’s both right and smart for the Democratic Convention to behave as if children exist.”  Lest we forget, this is the woman that insisted that the right to abortion is a bigger health issue than breast cancer. Now she’s asking for an arena full of liberals to “behave as if children exist?”

Delegate Susie Shannon, who likely supports the Democrat pro-choice platform, feels the “DNC is putting her in a tough position because she is bringing her 4-year-old along.”

Shannon said “The Democratic Party shouldn’t put you in a position where you have to choose between your child and participating in a political convention.”  Why not?  Hasn’t the Democratic Party, above all, earned the right to exercise choice?  Think of it this way, the Democrats are aborting children from the convention.

Furthermore, it could be that the DNC, in conjunction with Planned Parenthood, may think that refusing to supply childcare and making delegates “choose between [a] child and participating in a political convention,” might contribute to an uptick in business for the abortion provider prior to September 2016.

A Democrat Convention spokeswoman reminded perturbed delegates that there is a “list of private child care providers on an official vendor directory,” and that “facilities are being provided for nursing mothers.” For those upset about the “anti-mom” amenities, apparently nursing mothers’ accommodations aren’t woman-friendly enough.

Reminiscent of back-alley abortion rhetoric, Zoe Nicholson, president of the Pacific Shore NOW chapter, called for the DNC to end the “outdated practice” of not providing for unaborted youngsters.  That’s a stretch – demanding of a political party whose policy is to dispose of inconvenient babies that they accommodate uninvited children.

Zoe accused Democrats of discrimination, saying, “We believe this practice of discrimination needs to end in 2012.  This is the year for the Democratic leadership to demonstrate comprehensive support of women, ending this outdated practice and to state publicly that it supports true family values.”

Sorry Zoe, but asking the Democratic Party to support family values is like asking a vegan to dig into a juicy steak.

Maybe Steinem and NOW should consider the possibility that having little kiddies merrily running around or tiny cherubs wailing for a bottle, all burping, smiling and waving to convention goers, might make some of the women uneasy.

Let’s face it, listening to NARAL president Nancy Keenan militantly extol the virtues of abortion on demand while infants nap curled up in their mother’s arms would introduce an awkward dynamic into an otherwise festive atmosphere.

It’s bad enough that when Roe v. Wade is celebrated, it may be hard to distract delegates 38-years-old or younger that those born after 1973 stood a chance of missing out on an opportunity in 2012 to nominate a man who would have heartily supported a mother’s decision to abort them.

With that in mind, in lieu of welcoming in the children, a more appropriate idea might be to accommodate the needs of female convention goers by parking a pink Planned Parenthood mobile clinic on the curb outside the Time Warner Cable Arena.


Proud to share blog space with the wonderful Ethel Fenig

%d bloggers like this: