“Democrats Promise To Do What The Supreme Court Won’t – Stand Up for Women’s Rights”


POLITCUS USA

HOUSE DEMOCRATIC WOMEN

HOUSE DEMOCRATIC WOMEN

Helen Reddy – ‘I Am Woman’ (Live) 1975


“Congressman: ‘The Wife Is To Voluntarily Submit’ To Her Husband”


ThinkProgress

By Rebecca Leber

CREDIT: AP PHOTO/TIM KORTE

CREDIT: AP PHOTO/TIM KORTE

Republican lawmakers can’t seem to stop offending women, in spite of the GOP’s stated goal to attract women voters. Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM) explains in his recent memoir that it is the wife’s role to “voluntarily submit, just as the husband is to lovingly lead and sacrifice.”

The Washington Post reports that a chapter from Pearce’s new book emphasizes wives and husbands each have roles in the household, and the wife’s role is obedience. “The husband’s part is to show up during the times of deep stress, take the leadership role and be accountable for the outcome, blaming no one else,” Pearce writes. “The wife’s submission is not a matter of superior versus inferior; rather, it is self-imposed as a matter of obedience to the Lord and of love for her husband.”

Pearce maintains enough self-awareness to admit this conceit, which he attributes to the Bible, is unpopular. “The principle is among the most controversial of all directives coming from the Bible. Critics abound, both Christian and non-Christian.” He thinks too many of his friends “dealt with the directive by ignoring it.”

Not everyone ignores it; a sitting federal judge once wrote it is the wife’s job to “subordinate herself to her husband.”

FULL ARTICLE

WASHINGTON, DC: REPUBLICANS RENEW THEIR “WAR ON WOMEN”


cropped-header-war-on-women2.jpg

‘Libidos’? Did Huckabee miss the memo?

EDSHOW: “Romney Gets Tied in Knots on Abortion Position”


Romney: ‘fore and agin’ it!

Mitt Romney Will Say Anything to Win Cartoon 4


CNN: DON LEMON Interviews Former Fl Governor Charlie Crist on His Politics


 

Will the Republican Party Outlive

Mitt Romney and  Its Extremist Element?

ROMNEY KARTOON 3


How could one vote for a candidate for President who would discriminate against minority Americans in the 21st Century?


My fellow Americans:

I am successful ($$$) and I have a loving spouse. Vote for me and I will discriminate against minorities who are not armed with the BIG MONEY that I have which will allow me to take money from blacks, “the very poor,” poor whites. Look at me with my life partner at our marriage. Don’t we look great? As President I will deny this civil right to homosexuals. I will suppress civil rights of straights who live together in committed relationships forcing them into marriage. I will ignore that statistic that 50% of marriages end in divorce. I will continue the GOP War on Women and suppress their rights to their sexual functioning. (I think it is too late to tie them to the kitchen stove.) Vote for me so that I can come out of  my closet and reveal myself as the poster boy for THE TOP 1%, a/k/a my friends, the rich Americans.  With their money behind me I will cut federal benefits for the poor and down-trodden with “reforms” like taking away their food stamps, Medicaid and welfare. I will extend the Bush Tax Cuts for you.  Vote for me and you will hear me say what you want me to say. And, watch me serves my masters, Big Oil, the Koch Brothers and their ilk. I will keep my promise to deny federal funds to Planned Parenthood.  So, do I have your vote yet? [Poetic License]

President Obama’s Policies Keep Us from the Results of the European Austerity Measures 2


Last night I listened to former Labor Secretary Robert Reich on the ” EDSHOW.” He contrasted our reluctance to cut government spending to stimulate our economy versus Europe’s austerity measures to solve their problems.  They are now going into “double-dip recession.”  The UK and Spain lead the Euro stampede into financial chaos.  Wisely Barack Obama decided to save GM and to bailout the banks, etc.  Stimulus has kept our economy going. Spending is not ipso facto a bad thing.  Republicans are still making jokes about the stimulus programs of the current administration which were necessary to combat the financial mess created by two terms of the Republican government of President George W. Bush. [I am sure “W” didn’t apologize for his policies in his latest memoir.] People, whatever you feel about the pace of our general recovery, we cannot afford even the smallest consideration of a Romney presidency which would give us potentially eight more years of George W. Bush leading,surely, to global financial collapse which has been forestalled, so far, by the precautions of the administration of Barack Obama!

====O====

On The Rachel Maddow I learned that 31 Republican senators voted against the Violence Against Women Act.  That 31 includes young Marco Rubio of Florida.  Republicans decry our saying that they are waging a “War on Women.”  They seem unable to believe that their “War” is the result of observations of various GOP policies which work to suppress the civil rights of women…women they profess to love, even!  31 GOP senators have no problem with violence against women. I don’t see why this essential law was not made permanent.  It is too serious and pervasive to be subject to re-authorizations.  Is Mitt Romney really vetting young Marco Rubio for a job that would place him a heartbeat away from being our President should be suffer a Romney victory in November? God forbid! Also, House Republicans voted to pay for the reduction in the college loan rates with money taken from Obamacare examinations for women’s cancer screenings?  Could their motive be a secret even to them?  A child can see that Republicans are screwing women.  [Oops!]