American Feminists

Why is it that the women who constitute the American feminist movement are feckless when it comes to the subjugation of Islamic women and are seemingly unwilling or unable to play a role in the battle for Muslim women’s rights?

Could it possibly be that they are so preoccupied with their own imagined oppression, that they can not see the real oppression of other women … especially family-focused Muslim women?

Why is it that the Katha Pollits and Eve Enslers, the vagina warriors, and the university gender theorists cannot differentiate between a free and an unfree society … between the Promise Keepers and the Taliban … between being socially pressured to be fit and slim and being forced to wear a burkha.

I would think that American feminists would be leading the charge against Islamic oppression of women rather than working so hard at their plans to totally immasculate the red-blooded American male … and turn him into some kind of a “sissified metro-sexual nice guy.”

Americans United For Change

Americans United For Change is a radical left-wing group that is so rabid in its deep psychotic hatred of all things Bush, that it is planning to spend $8.5 million to ensure that President Bush’s approval ratings do not improve in the final year of his presidency. What kind of wacko planning is that?

The group’s president, Brad Woodhouse, pointed to President Reagan’s political recovery in 1988 and whined that “Progressives are still living with that.” Woodhouse complained that, “All of a sudden he [Reagan] became a rallying cry for conservatives and their ideology.”

Woodhouse went on to say that “progressives” fear that a Bush political recovery would help the GOP presidential nominee in this years presidential election. Really? Who would have thought?

I don’t know if President Bush’s approval ratings will climb much over the next year, but even if his “failed” administration does end up winning a war on terror, keeps our country safe, and presides over a period of decent economic growth, the left-wing Bush haters will continue to rant and foam at the mouth … spouting their rabid anti-Bush nonsense.

What happened to Fred in ’08?

It seems that Fred Thompson Lacked “Fire In His Belly.”

What is “fire in the belly?” In the world of politics, it is “an unquenchable thirst for power or glory; the burning desire to win a race or achieve a goal.” It seems that all you need to be president of the United States these days is “vein-popping ambition and “unrestrained avidity.”

“Nowadays,” Fred Thompson said somewhat sarcastically, “it’s all about fire in the belly. I’m not sure in the world we live in today it’s a terribly good thing that a president has too much fire in his belly.”

Fred … I agree with you! And … I also think we will miss you terribly next spring!

I do kind of like Alan Greenspan’s proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution:

“Anyone willing to do what is required to become president of the United States is thereby barred from office.“

It was Plato, I believe, who warned mankind to beware the overly ambitious political leader …. stating the man who must be prevailed upon to serve is the much better and safer choice.

Politics should be a moral enterprise!

Will The Principled Candidate Please Stand Up!

Two character traits for the principled candidate in politics are:

1. A principled man or woman regards politics as a moral enterprise
2. He or she speaks truth to the people and does not manipulate them.

Of course, left-wing progressive liberals will deny that man is a moral being and subject to moral laws … and thus … will always be offended by a man of principle. They would also seek to keep such men from high office.

I think this is the source of their deep psychotic hatred of President George Bush and candidates like Fred Thompson. Naturally, they would prefer a more, shall we say, Machiavellian type of leader.

A prime example of this is the lasting popularity of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who both possess a strongly Machiavellian political genius.

However, it seems to me that the political success of the “most expert manipulators of their fellow citizens” might not be what is best for this country … especially in a time of crisis … such as the ideology based War on Terror, the eroding of traditional American values and beliefs, and the internal attacks on our Second Amendment and other Constitutional rights that are going on now.

Personally, I feel that a time of crisis is when the leadership of a man (or a woman) of strong moral character is needed the most.

Is John McCain a conservative choice?

Senator John McCain won handily in Florida!

Many Conservatives claim that if McCain wins nomination they will leave the republican party … because the party no longer represent conservative values. Year after year Conservatives have had to settle for something that did not fully fit their idea of a conservative … many are simply tired of settling.

To me, Senator McCain is simply a lessor of evils, because he is too soft on illegal immigration, he voted against the Bush tax cuts, and I believe he will raise taxes.  His McCain-Feingold Act is a disaster and is a direct violation of the First Amendment’s Freedom of Speech.

However, he is strong on the War on Terror and the War in Iraq … and I do respect that.

With Fred Thompson out of the race, my support leans toward Mitt Romney. He has all the talent and leadership to unite and lead the Conservatives … he just needs to reach out to their base. Romney’s only sticky issue is abortion. He needs to come to terms on this issue with the Christian Right.

I feel like Romney is the one that could lead Conservatives in the right direction. His experience as a republican Governor in Massachusetts … a left-wing liberal haven state, his success with the Olympics, and his success as a business man … turning failing companies around and making them profitable, is just what this country needs.

But because of the left-wing media’s bias … it has been hard for Mitt Romney to get a break. The left-wing media seems to be pushing McCain.

It seems to me that Huckabee, Thompson, and Guliani also didn’t get a whole lot of news print or airtime. Could it be that they are force feeding McCain to the right?

Maybe they feel they will be able to win against McCain because of his support for the War on Terror and his weak debating skills? I hope the left-wing liberal media isn’t leading Republicans like lemmings … toward the cliff.