Faux Feminists Declare War on Women

Presently, in an effort secure the female vote, the very women who pride themselves on preventing gender discrimination are the ones suggesting that a woman's purpose, life experience, and ability to relate to others hinges solely on whether or not she chooses to work outside the home.  Moreover, according to some, the status of a woman in society is further measured by her husband's ability to provide for his family.  Therefore, according to that way of thinking, as a husband's salary increases a stay-at-home wife's worth diminishes.

One can only suppose that initially, comingling class warfare with gender politics by making 1% of America's women the object of derision seemed like genius on the left.  If successful, that scheme, together with the concocted Republican war on women, had the potential to secure Barack Obama 99% of the female voting bloc.  

However, despite the brilliance of the plan, obstacles are arising because distributing free morning-after pills to promiscuous college students is one thing but Americans, as a whole, do not take kindly to attacking women for being dedicated to hearth and home.

The person currently at the center of a national backlash is Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen, a dyed-in-the-wool liberal obsessed with using the word "faux." While pointing out that it might have been a faux pas on her part to suggest that financially supportive Republican men "do not support women," Hilary managed to squeeze in the word "faux" more than once.

It was on Anderson Cooper 360 that Rosen pointed out that affluent stay-at-home mom Ann Romney "never worked a day in her life." Lest we forget, these are the people who define feticide as "privacy." So, defining the word "work" may not be part of the liberal skill set.

Nevertheless, Hilary's "never worked a day" comment has been widely condemned all cross the political spectrum. If dividing women into subsets was the original goal of those on the left, prior to attacking Ann Romney for putting her children first maybe Democrats should have taken into consideration the fact that, whether a woman is a mother or not, every person does have a mother.

The White House must have realized that a liberal suggesting that a woman choosing to sacrifice a salaried career to stay home and raise small children isn't a valid description of a "worker" could threaten the original plan to secure the Friends-of-Fluke vote in November. With that in mind, Barack Obama, the king of "ill-advised comments," denounced Hilary's remarks as "ill-advised."

After being all but thrown under the Planned Parenthood shuttle bus by fellow Democrats for verbalizing what most liberals, both male and female, really think, Hilary Rosen played down the controversy by describing the uproar as -- you guessed it -- "faux anger."

Scrambling to make light of the insulting situation, Rosen, who Jay Carney finally admitted visited the White House three dozen times, offered a half-hearted apology by saying "Let's put the faux 'war against stay at home moms' to rest once and for all."

How ironic. In an effort to secure the female vote for Barack Obama, a liberal careerist may have unintentionally overplayed the divisive Democrat hand. Rather than guarantee votes for Obama, the combo of class/gender warfare appears to have set back the left's "divide and conquer" effort, and from the looks of things it may have even managed to re-galvanize varied groups the left had successfully pitted against each other in the past.

Still, damage control has not curtailed other candid liberal women from speaking out. Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW), disregarded Hilary Rosen being censured for her comments and poured salt on a wound the Democrats have been trying to heal for days.

And even though every Democrat from DNC pit bull Debbie Wasserman Schultz to Michelle "Every woman deserves to be respected" Obama have voiced "faux" dissatisfaction with Hilary Rosen making her stay-at-home-moms observation, arbiter of the right to choose and "equality for all women."  Terry O'Neill, felt it was necessary to underscore Hilary Rosen's original premise on the misogynist Ed Schultz' MSNBC  The Ed Show.  Speaking on behalf of women, Terry O'Neill attacked Mrs. Romney for not having to work at a "salaried" job.

The NOW president suggested that because Mitt Romney was successful in business and because his wife chose to "work" inside rather than outside the home, neither Mitt nor Ann have the "kind of life experience" or the "imagination" to relate to what American families go through. Therefore, it's apparently the opinion of some liberal women that the Romneys are a "faux" American family.

If the left ever hopes to successfully separate Americans into categorical groups that despise one another again, people like Hilary Rosen, Terry 'NOW' O'Neill and Maxine Waters (D-CA) -- who referred to the presumptive Republican nominee as "Mitt Rot-ney" -- had best zip it. However, because they all lack the necessary decorum to do so, it's highly unlikely they will.

Instead, based on what Democrats esteem, it appears that in 2012 the left is planning to elevate Barack Obama by advancing the notion that living on food stamps, making bi-annual visits to Planned Parenthood, and introducing yourself to people on the welfare line demonstrates the type of valor and visionary status both Mitt and Ann Romney lack.

If liberals are planning to gather unto themselves the votes of women by demeaning stay-at-home mothers and suggesting that raising children limits "life experience" and "imagination," divide-and-conquer Democrats may be making a huge political mistake.

Try as they might to advance the cause, undisciplined mouthpieces like NOW's Terry O'Neill and frequent White House visitor Hilary Rosen only underscore the notion that the same Democrats who base the value of human life on a woman's choice also base a woman's worth on the size of her paycheck which, quite frankly, sends a message to America that is contrary to the one Democrats originally intended.  And that message is that it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, who have declared war on women.

Author's content: www.jeannie-ology.com

Presently, in an effort secure the female vote, the very women who pride themselves on preventing gender discrimination are the ones suggesting that a woman's purpose, life experience, and ability to relate to others hinges solely on whether or not she chooses to work outside the home.  Moreover, according to some, the status of a woman in society is further measured by her husband's ability to provide for his family.  Therefore, according to that way of thinking, as a husband's salary increases a stay-at-home wife's worth diminishes.

One can only suppose that initially, comingling class warfare with gender politics by making 1% of America's women the object of derision seemed like genius on the left.  If successful, that scheme, together with the concocted Republican war on women, had the potential to secure Barack Obama 99% of the female voting bloc.  

However, despite the brilliance of the plan, obstacles are arising because distributing free morning-after pills to promiscuous college students is one thing but Americans, as a whole, do not take kindly to attacking women for being dedicated to hearth and home.

The person currently at the center of a national backlash is Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen, a dyed-in-the-wool liberal obsessed with using the word "faux." While pointing out that it might have been a faux pas on her part to suggest that financially supportive Republican men "do not support women," Hilary managed to squeeze in the word "faux" more than once.

It was on Anderson Cooper 360 that Rosen pointed out that affluent stay-at-home mom Ann Romney "never worked a day in her life." Lest we forget, these are the people who define feticide as "privacy." So, defining the word "work" may not be part of the liberal skill set.

Nevertheless, Hilary's "never worked a day" comment has been widely condemned all cross the political spectrum. If dividing women into subsets was the original goal of those on the left, prior to attacking Ann Romney for putting her children first maybe Democrats should have taken into consideration the fact that, whether a woman is a mother or not, every person does have a mother.

The White House must have realized that a liberal suggesting that a woman choosing to sacrifice a salaried career to stay home and raise small children isn't a valid description of a "worker" could threaten the original plan to secure the Friends-of-Fluke vote in November. With that in mind, Barack Obama, the king of "ill-advised comments," denounced Hilary's remarks as "ill-advised."

After being all but thrown under the Planned Parenthood shuttle bus by fellow Democrats for verbalizing what most liberals, both male and female, really think, Hilary Rosen played down the controversy by describing the uproar as -- you guessed it -- "faux anger."

Scrambling to make light of the insulting situation, Rosen, who Jay Carney finally admitted visited the White House three dozen times, offered a half-hearted apology by saying "Let's put the faux 'war against stay at home moms' to rest once and for all."

How ironic. In an effort to secure the female vote for Barack Obama, a liberal careerist may have unintentionally overplayed the divisive Democrat hand. Rather than guarantee votes for Obama, the combo of class/gender warfare appears to have set back the left's "divide and conquer" effort, and from the looks of things it may have even managed to re-galvanize varied groups the left had successfully pitted against each other in the past.

Still, damage control has not curtailed other candid liberal women from speaking out. Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organization for Women (NOW), disregarded Hilary Rosen being censured for her comments and poured salt on a wound the Democrats have been trying to heal for days.

And even though every Democrat from DNC pit bull Debbie Wasserman Schultz to Michelle "Every woman deserves to be respected" Obama have voiced "faux" dissatisfaction with Hilary Rosen making her stay-at-home-moms observation, arbiter of the right to choose and "equality for all women."  Terry O'Neill, felt it was necessary to underscore Hilary Rosen's original premise on the misogynist Ed Schultz' MSNBC  The Ed Show.  Speaking on behalf of women, Terry O'Neill attacked Mrs. Romney for not having to work at a "salaried" job.

The NOW president suggested that because Mitt Romney was successful in business and because his wife chose to "work" inside rather than outside the home, neither Mitt nor Ann have the "kind of life experience" or the "imagination" to relate to what American families go through. Therefore, it's apparently the opinion of some liberal women that the Romneys are a "faux" American family.

If the left ever hopes to successfully separate Americans into categorical groups that despise one another again, people like Hilary Rosen, Terry 'NOW' O'Neill and Maxine Waters (D-CA) -- who referred to the presumptive Republican nominee as "Mitt Rot-ney" -- had best zip it. However, because they all lack the necessary decorum to do so, it's highly unlikely they will.

Instead, based on what Democrats esteem, it appears that in 2012 the left is planning to elevate Barack Obama by advancing the notion that living on food stamps, making bi-annual visits to Planned Parenthood, and introducing yourself to people on the welfare line demonstrates the type of valor and visionary status both Mitt and Ann Romney lack.

If liberals are planning to gather unto themselves the votes of women by demeaning stay-at-home mothers and suggesting that raising children limits "life experience" and "imagination," divide-and-conquer Democrats may be making a huge political mistake.

Try as they might to advance the cause, undisciplined mouthpieces like NOW's Terry O'Neill and frequent White House visitor Hilary Rosen only underscore the notion that the same Democrats who base the value of human life on a woman's choice also base a woman's worth on the size of her paycheck which, quite frankly, sends a message to America that is contrary to the one Democrats originally intended.  And that message is that it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, who have declared war on women.

Author's content: www.jeannie-ology.com

RECENT VIDEOS