Make Hillary Rodham Fight for VAWA
The public relations campaign to launch Hillary Rodham’s presidential bid started before the 2004 election.
Even the most naïve of political observers could see that all of the questioning about whether she would run in 2004 was deliberately encouraged in order to keep her name in the news and to get people used to the idea of her running for President. Now, the game is to keep the press talking about her entering the race for 2008. Be prepared for her to officially launch her campaign after months or even years of fever pitched media speculation. She will enter under the mantra of a savior, not just for her party, but for the entire world.
The Seattle PI, of course, is dutifully playing their role in this drama. An opinion column by David Usborne finished with:
In the meantime, Republicans better get serious about who they will run three years from now. Senator Frist, who is obviously taking the highest profile within the party in order to lay a foundation for his bid in 2008, has the charisma of a wet doormat. Republicans need to remember that Bush won because he does have charisma. Democrats never understood that Bush’s challenged oratory is an asset, an endearing quality after years of slick talking politicians. His charisma is wrapped up in an honesty of presentation that people connect with. Frist is anything but that.
It’s not just Republicans that need to be concerned about Hillary Rodham. Men and fathers of all stripes should be very concerned about having a President that believes in her heart and soul in gender feminist ideology.
In fact, the first round of the war on the so-called patriarchy began in earnest when she was creating policy for Bubba. The nuclear bomb of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) landed on all men, and we have been living in nuclear winter ever since. VAWA has provided government funding to the gender feminist victim cult and, worse, stripped the Constitutional rights of half the population. Related “Deadbeat Dad" legislation has put thousands, perhaps millions, of poor and unemployed men in jail because they could not pay child support. Family courts too often do not make downward adjustments to child support when fathers experience financial difficulties. In a majority of these cases, the father does not have joint custody of the child. Meanwhile, mothers have no reason to honor court mandated visitation and often don't.
King County, WA is playing it’s role in the War on the Patriarchy, planning to make a show of hauling men who are unable to pay to jail. (Here is another example). The extremists in our county government are preparing for the “perp walk” just in time for Father’s Day, adding insult to injury for fathers already treated harshly in family courts and struggling with the reality that government can strip them of their children.
Here is a suggestion for Republicans: It is a bad idea to try to placate gender feminists by supporting VAWA. You will never get the votes of women that believe in this ideology.
With VAWA coming up for reauthorization in September, a better strategy for Republicans would be to challenge it and let Hillary Rodham defend it. Let the airwaves be filled with her demonstrating her gender feminist ideology instead of the giddy cable news commentary and psuedo analysis about the possibility of her running for office. There are many groups that would take up the fight on behalf of Republicans, including women such as those in the Independent Women’s Forum and iFeminists.
Make Hillary Rodham defend this legislation and expose her loathing for American men, fathers, and traditional families. Let her explain why 46% of men in their thirties in King County, WA have never been married because they see it as a high risk endeavor.
Even the most naïve of political observers could see that all of the questioning about whether she would run in 2004 was deliberately encouraged in order to keep her name in the news and to get people used to the idea of her running for President. Now, the game is to keep the press talking about her entering the race for 2008. Be prepared for her to officially launch her campaign after months or even years of fever pitched media speculation. She will enter under the mantra of a savior, not just for her party, but for the entire world.
The Seattle PI, of course, is dutifully playing their role in this drama. An opinion column by David Usborne finished with:
One thing is clear: The notion of President Hillary Clinton is no joke to anyone, least of all to Republicans.Usborne also speculated about Laura Bush running for President, couching the idea as a joke. Laura Bush would not be a joke as a Presidential candidate, but clearly this is not something that would make sense for 2008.
In the meantime, Republicans better get serious about who they will run three years from now. Senator Frist, who is obviously taking the highest profile within the party in order to lay a foundation for his bid in 2008, has the charisma of a wet doormat. Republicans need to remember that Bush won because he does have charisma. Democrats never understood that Bush’s challenged oratory is an asset, an endearing quality after years of slick talking politicians. His charisma is wrapped up in an honesty of presentation that people connect with. Frist is anything but that.
It’s not just Republicans that need to be concerned about Hillary Rodham. Men and fathers of all stripes should be very concerned about having a President that believes in her heart and soul in gender feminist ideology.
In fact, the first round of the war on the so-called patriarchy began in earnest when she was creating policy for Bubba. The nuclear bomb of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) landed on all men, and we have been living in nuclear winter ever since. VAWA has provided government funding to the gender feminist victim cult and, worse, stripped the Constitutional rights of half the population. Related “Deadbeat Dad" legislation has put thousands, perhaps millions, of poor and unemployed men in jail because they could not pay child support. Family courts too often do not make downward adjustments to child support when fathers experience financial difficulties. In a majority of these cases, the father does not have joint custody of the child. Meanwhile, mothers have no reason to honor court mandated visitation and often don't.
King County, WA is playing it’s role in the War on the Patriarchy, planning to make a show of hauling men who are unable to pay to jail. (Here is another example). The extremists in our county government are preparing for the “perp walk” just in time for Father’s Day, adding insult to injury for fathers already treated harshly in family courts and struggling with the reality that government can strip them of their children.
Here is a suggestion for Republicans: It is a bad idea to try to placate gender feminists by supporting VAWA. You will never get the votes of women that believe in this ideology.
With VAWA coming up for reauthorization in September, a better strategy for Republicans would be to challenge it and let Hillary Rodham defend it. Let the airwaves be filled with her demonstrating her gender feminist ideology instead of the giddy cable news commentary and psuedo analysis about the possibility of her running for office. There are many groups that would take up the fight on behalf of Republicans, including women such as those in the Independent Women’s Forum and iFeminists.
Make Hillary Rodham defend this legislation and expose her loathing for American men, fathers, and traditional families. Let her explain why 46% of men in their thirties in King County, WA have never been married because they see it as a high risk endeavor.
posted by Iguana at 10:27 AM
15 Comments:
Wow,
GREAT piece. Sure I happen to agree with what you said, but WELL written and concise.
Steven
ahem, *bullshit*
Yeah, I know anonymous, the audacity of the patriarchy has you upset lately.
Great blog; reality right between the eyes. It's bound to make the leftist establishmentarians snotty; note Anon's loss of control.
I cut thru the rubbish by watching Marxist femrads and their acolytes and minions, like Anon here, go for the profanity. Bullshit, like all the other peppery words from the Dysfunctional Party, do more then call attention to the failings of the writer.
They show normal folks just how incensed these self-appointed stuffed shirts are and how they're not going to take it anymore! Godamn it.
why is it "femrad" to expect men to take responsibility for where they splash their sperm? y'all on the right certainly don't mind forcing women to have children they don't want. so y'all really oughtta force the men responsible to pay up.
yokels.
So Jami, it's so simple...men just "splash sperm" and women, those poor delicate things, just suffer for it. Oh, the world is so cruel and men are the source.
I happen to know a sperm splasher who had his two sons moved away by a distance of half a country. My friend, the sperm splaser, spent a small fortune not trying to get his sons back from his wife, but just rying to get the right to talk to them on the phone and perhaps visiting them from time to time. He was a man who would have ealked through molten lava to see his own sons once a year.
So much for your goddam theory, you c**nt.
Multiply this by about 40 million and you have the present history of "sperm splashers" in America.
By the way, Jami, it ain't a matter of "y'all on the right". The clever thing about the modern feminist movement is that they have managed to completely fuck up the lives of all loving fathers, left and right, without distinction.
So stitch that you poor, man hating bitch.
And the next time, keep your knees together and stop the tequila shooters at seven.
This is not a right wing blog, Jami. Pointing out the silliness of Seattle does not require one to be conservative or right wing.
On the issue of child support, Silly Seattle believes that all children need to be supported. If a woman should have custody of a child, then the child's father should pay child support. Nobody is arguing with that.
However, there are vital parts of the equation that seemed to be left at the door step by the "femrads" that currently posture as the "voice of women."
The forgot that children need fathers. We call for a presumption of joint custody. There is no reason in today's world for a court to assume that a child should be with his mother.
As far as child support goes, if a father gets primary custody of a child, courts will rarely order a woman to pay child support. That needs to change. And, when there is a joint custody, a woman can work and make her own way in today's world, so when there is joint custody, there is no reason for the father to pay child support as he will cover his own share while the child is with him.
Regardless of who has custody of the child, both parties have a responsibility once that child is born: they need to make sure the child has access to both parents. That means that there should be a law and enforcement against Move Away Moms.
Finally, with regard to your ridiculous claim that men spash their sperm around: I'll refer you to the post above.
Great work! Long time since I've been in your neck of the woods... from Vancouver BC originally and Seattle was my favorite sister city!
That is until feminut bullshit (cowshit?) made living in urban environments a loosing proposition for a man who hates feminists! Had to move to the country, far, far away from urbanite feminazi be-hautches! Not many feminists in the country: too difficult to slag men when they depend on men in a very obvious way in a small rural rugged environment.
But I digress...
What happens in the US has profound effects upon Kanada, the so-called quasi-democracy that is overrun with state sanctioned and tax payer funded hate groups: woymins groups. If you folks manage to 'stay the course' against the tide of hate that is feminism then perhaps there is hope for the Western world after all.
I love the line where you say to the Republicans not to pander for a vote they'll never get anyway! Same line I used in a letter I wrote to our inadequate Premier Campbell during our recent election, saying don't incease funding for sexist anti-male safe house and other shit for feminists when they won't vote for you anyway. What a prick he is!
I'm afraid your Republican party is no better... Here's hoping I'm wrong!
Keep up the great work! First time on the site and love it longtime!
Thanks no2fembots.
Republicans are too wrapped up in their evangelical ideology to realize what the average guy is going through. And, I'm not sure they would care if they did.
It's sad to see democracies turn the weapons of government against segments of their own population. Sometimes I think that is inevitable. But I hope I am wrong.
VAWA will be passed in enhanced and more discriminatory form, extending the frontiers of State this year, next year and the year after that. Do not hold your breath. It would be an absurdity for any society grounded in our current base philosophy of life to do otherwise.
A State that implements a Bradely amendment, executes a policy of Extraordinary Renditions, Unilaterally imposes Regime change and whose allies themeselves institute equivalents of the Star Chamber in Family Courts and a Special immigration Appeals Comission for example.
Fascism, Nazism, Apartheid, Slavery, Feminism etc, etc, all these are manifestations of functioning democracies in our time. They were and are political policy positions adopted by allied States in Unison and not alone.
Does the mens movement propose an alternative grounding philosophy of state: Or do we stand for mere inclusion via legislation, in the goods and spoils of corruption from internal and extra national perfidy ?
Senator Hitllary couldn't defend Shinola from a combat boot. The VAWA ought to be forgotten for the good of every family in America.
Why do you guys need to disagree with someone by saying vile and almost violent insults?
Don't you think it would be more effective to argue rationally with information. You only end up seeming just like the people you are upset with.
Angry, resentful, hateful and wanting to punish all the women for the bad of a certain group of women.
Iguana, you say you support women you call "equity feminists" and by your terms I fit there, but I am still offended that you don't try to calm any of the hateful, anti-woman speech on here... in fact you seem to support it.
Anon - I have not read any hateful, anti-woman speech here. If I did see someone making general statements about ALL woman, I would definitely call them on it.
I also have not read anyone state that they want to punish all woman.
The writing here is strong and straightforward. After seeing friends get demolished by the family court system, I believe that we need to help men wake up and realize what has been done to their most basic rights. So, we don't hold back when criticizing the party responsible: the gender feminist victim cult.
Actually, some amazing women support this site and support the movement to stop the attacks on men and fathers. Since you seem to see violence in verbal debate, I wonder if you really count yourself among the equity feminists.
The gender feminists have been at their hatefull activity for 3 decades and now have government sponsorship. There agenda is quite evil and hateful and we see no reason to avoid calling it such.
You seem to have missed the main point. Hillary is herself a batterer. For her to defend VAWA is to say that she herself should have been kicked out of her home, given a restraining order, perhaps allowed supervised visitation with her daughter for an hour a week and forced to attend a batterers re-education program where she admits to her battering or goes to jail.
So will the Republicans hold her feet to the fire, or pander to the feminists in the domestic violence industry as the have for so many years?
Anonymous - All the more reason to make her defend VAWA. She should be asked that question point blank and in public for all to here: Since she said she hit Clinton, is she guilty of domestic violence and should she be treated any differently from a man under VAWA.
Either she turns herself in to the DV gulag for re-education and socialization OR she says that VAWA is about smacking the "patriarchy" out of men and so she should not go (since she is supposedly not part of the "patriarchy").
Unfortunately, this is all academic at the moment. My guess is the Republicans will pander to the feminists.
Men and fathers need to make it clear that any party that votes for VAWA will have to pay the price of lost votes and lost campaign contributions.
Post a Comment
<< Home