It’s bad enough that some women actually believe the Democrat Party serves their best interest . It’s even worse that women buy into the Democrat lies about history – no it wasn’t the Democrat Party that fought for women’s right to vote – they fought against it. The only party to vote ‘NAY’ on the Equal Pay Act was the Democrat Party. It was the Democrat Party who put Affirmative Action into the Frank-Dodd Financial Reform bill because apparently in 2012 they believe women are too stupid to get jobs in the financial industry based on their own merit and experience.
What you have today is the Democrat Party doubling down on dumbing down women. They have got women actually believing that the Ledbetter Act is about equal pay. It isn’t. The Ledbetter Act is about lawsuits. It was a win for lawyers, not women. There were already laws in place for women to seek recourse if they were not getting equal pay for equal work. But to Democrat women, the Ledbetter Act is about equal pay and Obama is pro-women because he signed it into law. They couldn’t be more wrong.
If Obama is pro-equal pay for women why doesn’t he pay women in the White House equal pay to men? Obama was all about equal pay in his 2008 election campaign yet he didn’t pay women equally on his campaign staff . Who did? John McCain. So their big ‘champion’ of equal pay isn’t a champion at all, he’s a heel.
Democrat women have been angrier than hell over Rush Limbaugh calling fake plant activist Sandra Fluke a slut (he was wrong to do it) yet where were these same women when Bill Maher was calling Sarah Palin a c*nt and a dumb tw*t ?? They have been so dumbed down by the male-dominated Democrat Party they are nothing more than left wing puppets who will kick and scream when told you by their masters. They do it on cue even. As soon as any male on the right makes a dumb comment (they all do on both sides but interestingly only one side gets attacked by the shrill puppets), the talking points are sent out and the kicking and screaming begins.
This whole manufactured ‘GOP War on Women’ is another great example of the dumbing down of women by Democrats. Democrats believe that of the millions of women in this country abortion and birth control are the biggest issues for all of us. Are they really that stupid? Democrat women are apparently. Feel free to have all the sex you want – it is your responsibility. Have a good time and oh yeah, birth control is cheap, better yet make your partner pay for it. Democrat women don’t care that under Obama’s rule women in extreme poverty has risen to its highest level in HISTORY. Democrat women don’t care that more women are unemployed under Obama than in years. What these fools do not realize is that abortion isn’t going away. When Republicans had the White House, Congress and the SCOTUS, Roe v Wade wasn’t overturned. Ta da!
The number one issue for the majority of women in this country is the economy but to Democrat women it’s ‘hands off my uterus’ but um pay for my birth control. The Democrat Party has double downed on dumbing down women in the past few years and it’s an embarrassment. As a feminist (no not a femi-nazi, man hating beast – those women are not feminists), I’m appalled on how dumb women have become and that they’ve been led like little poodles on a leash by men. I have fought against stupid female stereotypes my entire life by working hard, studying hard and proving that I can do anything a man can do (okay really… I CAN change my oil but I’d rather not). It is 2012 and we have an entire portion of the female population who have taken feminism and thrown it in the garbage because they’d rather be puppets for men than BE the puppet masters.
UPDATE: Add Paycheck Fairness Act to this list. ANOTHER useless bill that is pandering to Democrat women for political purposes only further dumbing them down (if that’s possible). The bill again is about lawsuits and and doesn’t change the fact that we have Equal Pay laws already in place. Of course, left wing shills are screaming that anyone who is against it is against women. Are they really that dumb or are they just playing a political game being used as objects because Obama cannot run on his failed economic record?
Today the New Hampshire State Legislature had the opportunity to turn the state into a Right-to-Work state. Rather than choosing freedom for workers ala ‘Live Free or Die’, they chose to keep New Hampshire workers in forced unionism shackles. The legislation will not end unions but will give workers the choice whether or not to join a union. Federal law only allows workers to ‘opt out’ of actual union membership but they are still forced to pay an agency fee even if they can negotiate for themselves. New Hampshire’s ‘Live Free or Die’ motto should be changed to ‘Live Free with Union Chains’ now that the Senate decided to table the bill which essentially means ‘killing the bill’.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics only 11.1% of workers in New Hampshire are members of a union. Why did the New Hampshire Legislature pander to only 11.1% of the workforce? Clearly the other 89.9% represent a far bigger portion of NH than the small special interest minority. And that’s where the truth probably lies. It’s already a well-known fact that Democrats are bought and paid for by unions. In the New Hampshire Legislature it’s also a well-known fact that some Republicans are also union puppets.
Continue reading on Examiner.com New Hampshire Legislators don’t understand ‘Live Free or Die’ – Manchester Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-manchester/new-hampshire-legislators-don-t-understand-live-free-or-die#ixzz1rlzmSniR
Democrats and the Obama Administration have created some amusing propaganda recently – the GOP’s ‘War on Women’. Many people believe there is no war on women (there isn’t in the form that Obama is peddling) but in reality there has been a war waged against women for many years – by Democrats. Let’s start with a little stroll back through history.
It was Democrats who didn’t want women to get the right to vote nationally: From the New York Times
Sunday, February 15, 1920
Booms Mrs. Catt for Presidency
Minnesota Delegate’s Suggestion Rouses Furor in Suffrage Convention
Praise Hays and Cummings
League Takes the Place of Old Association That Won the Fight
CHICAGO, Feb. 14 – The National American Woman’s Suffrage Association today came to the defense of Will Hays, Chairman of the Republican National Committee, who has been attacked by anti-suffragists for aid rendered to the suffrage cause, and congratulated the Republican Party “for having a Chairman who is astute enough to recognize the certain trend of public affairs and to lead his party in step with the inevitable march of human progress.”
It was under Democrat President Wilson that women (suffragettes) who were protesting for their right to vote outside of the White House were arrested and confined to prison
The Democrats’ ‘War on Poverty’ has done nothing to ease poverty but has increased the number of women IN poverty and dependent on the government.
What was the message of the social programs that came out of LBJ’s Great Society?
One of the most devastating to the family was that if an unwed woman became pregnant, moved out of the home of her parents, did not name or know who the father was, then Big Daddy in Washington would provide for all her essential needs. Ergo she no longer needed a husband or the support of her family. In fact, the more children she had out of wedlock, the more money she would receive from the government.
The ‘Great Society’ hurt black women and families the most and still does to this day:
…That’s the deal that the Great Society struck with low-income black women in the 1970s. The result: the marginalization of black men, an explosion of single-parent households, and the institutionalization of a near-permanent under-class.
Forty years ago, social scientists devised a clever euphemism to sum up the effects of a government program that picks taxpayers’ wallets, weakens the family, and turns women into wards of the state: the feminization of poverty.
Continue reading on Examiner.com There has always been a ‘War on Women’ – waged by Democrats – Manchester Political Buzz | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/political-buzz-in-manchester/the-war-on-women-has-always-been-waged-by-democrats#ixzz1rItmnJzD
The GOP primaries have become such a bore they aren’t worth watching any longer (all the good soundbites come out right afterwards anyway so it’s not like I’m missing anything). How many debates do Republicans and the media think people can take within a given amount of time? One debate per primary would serve the purpose. The debates I truly care about seeing are the ones between Obama and the GOP nominee. Those will be interesting debates although odds are the Liberal moderators will throw Obama fluff questions rather than hard hitting questions about his failed presidency. I have no horse in the GOP race nor am I overtly fond of any of the candidates still in the race. I like something about all of them and dislike things about all of them. What I DO know is that ANY of them would be better than Obama.
There are only 4 GOP candiates left…. so what have we got?
Mittens aka Mitt Romney – the (cue the far right’s scary music) ‘Massachusetts Republican’. He’s an extremely successful businessman who also ran the state of Massachusetts pretty well. People whine about ‘Romneycare’ but what they don’t get is many in MA wanted that crap sandwich (remember… Marxichusetts is uber progressive HELL). If the majority of MA residents didn’t want it, they would have done something to get rid of it by now – they haven’t. Mitt comes off as what I call an ‘Alex P. Keaton’ Republican – safe, intelligent, dresses well, great business/economic mind but isn’t very exciting. The thing is there are many Indies who would vote for him in a heartbeat over Obama even though they voted for Obama in 2008.
The Lizard King aka Newt Gingrich – the man who cheated on his 1st wife with his 2nd wife then cheated on his 2nd wife with his 3rd and current wife aka helmet head. I somehow cannot see a ‘floozy FLOTUS’ in the White House. Granted Michelle Obama lowered the bar in her roll as FLOTUS but not even low enough for people to believe someone like Gingrich’s wife OR Gingrich should be in the highest position in this country. Not to mention Newt is the KING of Establishment even though he feigns he is not. He never left D.C. when he was forced to resign. He just made millions of dollars as a ‘non-lobbyist’ lobbyist. The man has his hands in all kinds of organizations, including his own, that stand to make millions off of things like Obamacare.
Sanitorium aka Rick Santorum – the man who people believe ‘hates gays’. Yeah that’ll win over the Indies (who are fiscally conservative and socially moderate). Santorum is a dud. He lost his last senate race by such a huge margin they should have forced ‘mercy rules’ on his opponent. Santorum lost me when I found out he voted AGAINST a National Right to Work bill while Senator.
The Angry Elf aka Ron Paul – the man who people think of as their ‘crazy Grandpa’. The oldest and oddest of all the candidates. Ron Paul has been in Congress for over two decades yet has gotten jack & squat accomplished. Sorry but any ass can vote ‘NAY, ‘YEA’ or ‘PRESENT’ – Obama is a perfect example. Paul doesn’t win a majority of ANY voter type unless you are an anarchist. Some of his rabid followers aka Roasted Paulnuts claim HE is the most Conservative of all the candidates yet he has not won the majority of Conservative votes in any of the primaries to date, not even in New Hampshire which is where the Libertarian ‘Free State Project’ set its roots. Just imagine what ‘regular Americans’, who are not involved in politics at all, would think if they saw Paul in a general election debate with Obama? Obama wouldn’t have to spend a dime of his huge campaign coffers to win against Paul.
So again… wake me when the GOP primaries are over. I’m hoping Republicans actually pick the best candidate to win against Obama. This whining about ‘who is more conservative’ or ‘who is more liberal’ really doesn’t matter. YOU, my dear Republicans, do not win elections – Indies do. If you are smart you will pick the right candidate and you will make SURE that Republicans take over the Senate and maintain control of the House because no matter who is elected, they will need to be reigned in and controlled by ‘we, the people’ aka GOOD representatives. I shudder to think that if Obama is re-elected he will possibly have two SCOTUS nominations. If that were to happen, we can all kiss the Constitution and this country BUH-BYE.
What exactly did the exit poll numbers say? (You can see some of the charts depicting the results for the top candidates below).
What’s interesting about these exit poll numbers is that people continue to claim Ron Paul is the most Conservative candidate yet it seems the people who are most conservative voted from Romney. He and Romney almost tie in the ‘somewhat Liberal’ category.
The exit polls showed that while Paul earned the majority of his votes from the younger crowd, Romney earned the most votes from every other age range, including 26% of the younger vote. In line with age, Paul also earned the most votes from those making the least money at 35% with Romney not far behind at 31%. Romney won the votes by all other income levels with only Paul close behind in the $30-50K levels.
Voters who have never voted in a Republican primary before gave Paul the most votes while those who have voted in a primary before gave Romney the majority of votes.
When it comes to Party Identification, meaning which party the voter most identifies with, Huntsman scores Democrats with 40%, Paul with 25% and Romney only 14%. Republicans overwhelming voted for Romney and Independents went for Paul with Romney only 1% point behind.
Romney wins both Registered Independents and Republicans with Paul only 3% points behind for Registered Independents.
Finally when it comes down to voter ideology, Romney earns the most by people from across the spectrum from ‘Somewhat Liberal’ (Paul is only 2% points behind) to Very Conservative. No other candidate comes close to Romney in the Moderate to Very Conservative ideologies.
What’s interesting is that the Paul camp claims that Ron Paul has won over Independents. Clearly he has not or the percentages would have been much higher in his favor, especially in New Hampshire where Libertarians (Paul’s true ‘party’) have pretty decent numbers and Paul has had a big presence here since 2008. They also claim that Paul is the most conservative but he didn’t even come close to Romney in garnering the Conservative voters. What is very interesting is support from the Tea Party. Ron Paul’s proponents claim he started the Tea Party yet Romney appears to have gotten far more support from Tea Partiers than Ron Paul. One thing is pretty clear, some Republicans do not seem to have a grip on Independents. The candidate that can win over Republicans AND the Indies, will win the race.
In a special election to replace Republican Bob Mead in Hillsborough’s 4th District, Democrat Jennifer Daler took the race over Republican Peter Kucmas with 1401 votes to his 1007. Democrats are now claiming this was ‘high voter turnout’ . Say what? In the 2010 elections Jennifer Daler lost with 2497 votes, which is more than the combined total for both candidates in this race. In 2008 Daler had even more votes when she lost at 3512 . Regardless of the outcome, there was very low voter turnout for this race. This is typical with special elections but the Democrats are claiming a ‘referendum’. Voters may very well have decided they wanted some balance in the Senate (it will still be a Republican majority) but the voter totals do not show anyone to be overwhelming interested in this race on either side.
Results from the 2010 election:
Results from the 2008 election:
Both sides will now start playing the ‘spin game’. The Democrats are already trying to tell people there was high voter turnout when the facts prove there was not. It would be interesting to see how many Indies actually voted in this election. Since Daler has previously lost other elections, what does that say about her as a candidate and about voters in the district? What does this say about Kucmas? Daler had more votes in 2008 and 2010 then both candidates combined in this 2011 election. Is this a referendum on House Speaker O’Brien and the Republican majority? It doesn’t really seem so since the voter turnout was so low; however, regardless of voter turnout, Daler still won in a district that has consistently voted Republican.
Donald Trump announced that he will not run for President in 2012 – bringing his three-ring circus to a long-overdue end. Why anyone thought that ‘The Donald’ was ever a serious candidate is befuddling. Trump is known for his antics to get ratings and draw attention to himself and his business endeavors such as ‘The Apprentice’ and the Miss USA pageant. Trump has a long list of why he isn’t a Conservative yet because he was opening his big mouth and feigning to actually care about the conservative movement, he won over some Independents and even Republicans. His polling numbers were sky high for a while but thankfully, as people learned the truth about him, his polling numbers started tanking. Frankly he shouldn’t have ever been on the radar.
Trump did nothing but make a mockery of conservatism and aided the Democrats in making Republicans look foolish – think ‘Birthers’. As if Trump actually got Obama to release his long-form birth certificate. Voters need to really start vetting candidates better before they jump on any bandwagon. It’s not enough to listen to the words candidates are spouting; their past history must be researched. Voters know this all too well since Obama was elected based on his speeches and not what his past actions told about him. Had voters actually researched Obama’s past, they would have seen what many Conservatives discovered and realized the man was not suited for the Presidency, same thing with Trump. Interesting that both Obama and Trump have a lot in common – both narcissists, both like to hear themselves speak but don’t like when others have differing opinions and both like to bloviate rhetoric without having mentionable actions to back up their ‘ideology’.
Continue reading at Examiner.
In a statement released today by the New Hampshire Senate Democrats, they accuse Republicans of focusing on ‘fringe social issues’ rather than economic growth. Do they have a clue? As reported by Marc Fortier:
CONCORD – Senate Republicans continue to follow their House colleagues’ lead by focusing on fringe social issues while simultaneously moving to water-down two programs aimed at economic growth and job creation. Today, the Senate passed measures to turn the New Hampshire Rail Transit Authority into a powerless study committee and weaken New Hampshire’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).
“New Hampshire voters sent us to Concord to focus on improving our economy and to foster job growth,” said Sen. Sylvia Larsen (D-Concord). “By watering-down both New Hamsphire’s participation in RGGI and the job creating New Hamsphire Rail Transit Authority, Senate Republicans have instead hindered job growth and turned away opportunities to grow our economy.”
Participation in the RGGI costs New Hampshire residents more money out of their already strapped wallets and does absolutely nothing to help the environment. Not to mention that the funds extracted from charging utility companies for ‘carbon credits’ have been used to give businesses and special interest groups money that they either don’t need or otherwise would have to find elsewhere. RGGI does not create jobs, it stifles jobs growth if anything because it adds to the cost of doing business in New Hampshire. Maybe the Senate Democrats should take a look at how Cap & Trade has failed in Europe before pretending it’s a success here or that it actually stimulates job growth.
All the Senate needs to do in regards to a Rail Transit Authority is take a look at Massachusetts. New Hampshire is a small state with a small population, it does not need a high speed federal boondoogle rail project that will absolutely cost more than it is estimated (which is one reason most states are refusing to add this to their roster of ‘things to do’) and in the long run will cost the taxpayers much more than the benefit.
What the Senate Democrats refused to acknowledge in their statement is how Governor Lynch vetoed the Right-to-Work bill that was passed by a majority in the legislature. This bill would absolutely bring economic growth and jobs to New Hampshire but since most Democrats are against it, they simply ignore the facts. These are not ‘fringe social issues’ as the Democrats stated, they are important issues that affect the people of New Hampshire. By opting out of RGGI, consumers and businesses save money. By avoiding Obama’s high speed rail, NH residents again save money. By vetoing the Right-to-Work bill, Governor Lynch and the Democrats who support his veto, cost New Hampshire economic growth and jobs. Do the Senate Democrats have a clue?
If you had the stomach to listen to Obama’s latest debacle of a speech, you would have heard the usual – class warfare, compassion, inherited from Bush, tax increases, fair share yada, yada, yada – yawn (Joe Biden even fell asleep). The same typical progressive b.s. that Obama spews during any of his speeches only his new buzz word is ‘Winning The Future’. Of course, most Americans know that we won’t be winning the future until 2012 when Obama is voted out of office. It’s really simple – Obama came up with a 2012 budget that increased the deficit by over $1 trillion alone. There were no serious considerations of budget cuts or entitlement reforms. There were no serious reforms of any kind even thought we are on the tipping edge of disaster when it comes to spending and outrageous debt and deficit.Chairman of the House Budget Committee Paul Ryan delivered a plan that will decrease the deficit by $6 trillion over the next 10 years. While the plan may not be perfect, at least he actually came up with a plan that delves into the real issues causing some of the huge and unsustainable spending in this country. Obama figured he’d have to pretend to actually care about our unsustainable spending so came out (sort of) with some his own ‘progressive’ ideas on how to cut the federal budget. Of course Obama uses the word ‘scalpel’ which as most know is a tiny instrument to make tiny incisions. What this country needs, in the words of Republican Tom Coburn, is a ‘chainsaw’ to attack the budget.
Ryan’s response is below in full:
Paul Ryan Responds to President’s Disappointing, Partisan Speech
WASHINGTON – House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan made the following statement after attending the President’s speech on deficit reduction:
“When the President reached out to ask us to attend his speech, we were expecting an olive branch. Instead, his speech was excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate, and hopelessly inadequate to address our fiscal crisis. What we heard today was not fiscal leadership from our commander-in-chief; we heard a political broadside from our campaigner-in-chief.
“Last year, in the absence of a serious budget, the President created a Fiscal Commission. He then ignored its recommendations and omitted any of its major proposals from his budget, and now he wants to delegate leadership to yet another commission to solve a problem he refuses to confront.
“We need leadership, not a doubling down on the politics of the past. By failing to seriously confront the most predictable economic crisis in our history, this President’s policies are committing our children to a diminished future. We are looking for bipartisan solutions, not partisan rhetoric. When the President is ready to get serious about confronting this challenge, we’ll be here.”
Key Facts About the President’s Speech
- Counts unspecified savings over 12 years, not the 10-year window by which serious budget proposals are evaluated.
- Postpones all savings until 2013 – after his reelection campaign.
- Runs away from the Fiscal Commission’s recommendations on Social Security – puts forward no specific ideas or even a process to force action.
- Calls for the appointment of another commission, after mostly omitting from his Fiscal Year 2012 Budget any of proposals submitted by the commission he appointed last year.
- Non-specific framework fails to meet his Fiscal Commission’s own deficit-reduction goals.
- Proposes to raise taxes on the American people by more than $1 trillion, devastating our fragile economy and stifling job creation.
- Endorsed the Fiscal Commission’s ideas on taxes, which specifically called for lower tax rates and a broader base, but then called for higher tax rates. Which is it?
- Government health and retirement programs are growing at more than twice the speed of the economy. At the current rate of spending, revenue would have to rise “by more than 50 percent” just to keep debt at its current level, according to the Government Accountability Office. That means tax increases across-the-board, now and in the future.
- Instead of proposing structural reforms that would actually reduce health care costs, the President proposed across-the-board cuts to current seniors’ care.
- Strictly limits the amount of health care seniors can receive within the existing structure of unsustainable government health care programs.
- Gives more power to unelected bureaucrats in Washington to determine what treatments seniors should or shouldn’t get, against a backdrop of costs that continue to rise.
- Conceded that the relentlessly rising cost of health care is the primary reason why the nation is threatened by debt, and implicitly conceded that his health care law failed to solve the problem.
- Eviscerates the only competitive element anywhere in health-care entitlement programs – the competition amongst Part D prescription-drug plans – which allowed the drug benefit to come in 41 percent under budget.
- Acknowledges that the open-ended financing of Medicaid is a crippling financial burden to both states and the federal government, but explicitly rejected the only solution to this problem, which is to give states the freedom they need to design systems that work for the unique needs of their own populations.
- Proposes more cuts on top of $78 billion in cuts included in his own defense budget, which he proposed just two months ago – all at a time when he continues to task the military with new missions.
- Secretary Gates has said that the military needs 2 percent – 3 percent real growth just to keep executing the missions that DOD has already been assigned.
- Secretary Gates described deficit reduction plans that let budget targets drive defense policy as “math, not strategy.”
Since it has become pretty clear that Obama knows absolutely nothing about the economy other than how to make it worse for the middle class and Americans in general, it’s pretty easy to see who will be ‘winning the future’ and it certainly isn’t the Democrats. They’ve had since 2007 to actually prove they are useful but have done everything to prove they are not. When they controlled both the Legislative and Executive branches over the past 3 years, they did absolutely nothing but increase the deficit and make our economy worse. For any American to believe that Obama and the Democrats will do an ‘about face’ now and actually do anything to ease the spending in this country is complete and utter lunacy.
Note to Obama and pals like Paul Krugman: FDR’s spending policies turned the Depression into the GREAT Depression.