This past week the "progressive" left laid claim to the women's vote of 2012.
They intend to compete for the hearts and minds of women.
They intend to win the votes of women, and they will lie, confuse, and mislead if necessary to do so.
In short the left believe that the women's vote in America is something they can manipulate devoid of fact.
More pathetically they believe women in droves will cascade with them over the cliff into the insanity the left offers--all the while attempting to convince them they are truly on their side.
To the left, women are just another group, like ethnicities, and sexual identities, that they believe they can victimize--then rescue, all in the matter of the twenty-second soundbite.
They've even recruited women to do it--case and point--Democratic Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who recently assumed control of the DNC.
I've watched Schultz on her pundit hits on cable news, and have never really been very fascinated by any of the victimology ideas she has to peddle. Now that she speaks for the entirety of her party however, her words become seemingly more important. This last week she laid her strategy bare:
“It’s just so hard for me to grasp how they [Republicans] can be as anti-woman as they are,” she said. “I think that the pushback and the guttural reaction from women against the Republicans’ agenda out of the gate, the war on women that the Republicans have been waging since they took over the House, I think is not only going to restore but help us exceed the president’s margin of victory in the next election."
So Republicans are at war with women? Really?
Then why are the most reliable voting block for the GOP - married moms? What... Do they not count?
Schultz is a life long politician, she studied political science in college, worked on getting elected, and now brings home enough pork to keep the district coming back to vote her back in year after year. She has been married to the same man for twenty years, and in liberal political circles--that's a lifetime. She is also the mother of three children and from every outward sign seems to be pretty good at it.
Yet my mind wonders, "How is it that liberals get to constantly make these crazy statements like, 'the GOP is at war with women?'"
I know personally I'd never tangle with women where the area of war is concerned. Women like K.T. McFarland--who was the civilian equivalent of a three star general in her Pentagon days--nope, wouldn't take her on.
Or how 'bout that Sarah Palin lady? Wasn't she drawing crowds as big as Obama's by the end of the campaign in 2008, and don't her book sales dwarf the current President's? There's an accomplished woman in Colorado Springs named Esther Fleece who undertook that Focus On The Family's outreach to people under the age of thirty in 2010, she also knows more about sports than most guys.
Of course that slacker Dr. Condoleeza Rice didn't set the bar very high--speaks several languages, brilliantly trained concert pianist, served as the both National Security Advisor and Secretary of State, not to mention provost in higher education and understands the NFL better than you do.
There's Lila Rose who has given undercover investigation--a whole new meaning--in becoming the tip of the spear in the efforts to defund tax-payers from the clutches of Planned Parenthood.
Or how 'bout someone on par with Schultz, Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. A woman who has her law doctorate, and was a practicing tax litigation attorney handling mounds of both criminal and civil cases. She raised five children of biological relation and adopted 23 foster kids. She successfully runs a small business that operates a facility for the mentally challenged and she and her husband have met that fifty-person-plus payroll faithfully. She's been re-elected on the state and federal level multiple times, sits on the committees that oversee spending and security, and oh yeah--might just run for President.
The list could be extended at some length, but a simple question for Rep. Schultz, "Where is your proof that the GOP is at war with these ladies?" Because while I'm not 100% certain, I'm fairly sure none of them embrace your ideas of equality for women--a world without men, where butchery of your own children is praised, immoral liberties are encouraged, and the idea of nurturing one's children is the equivalent to dropping a nuclear bomb.
Oh I know that they don't like certain things that you deem really important--like forcing all tax-payers to participate in elective abortions through the redistribution of the monies we earn to Planned Parenthood--who then in turn give you gobs of it to get re-elected each year. Still I don't really find you very convincing.
Sure there is much to be gained by the left attempting to convince women that the GOP--through reducing the size of government--is out to "injure" women. But in order for that rhetorical ploy to be of any effect said women who are voting would have to be magnanimously ignorant of the facts. Which must be the kind of women that Democrats want voting for them.
Idea: Schultz should just wear a sandwich board with "Everybody Stupid Follow Me" printed on it.
The truth is women by the boatloads are waking up to the realities and rewards of personal responsibility. When they see the job they can do for themselves as opposed to "needing" Sugar Daddy Uncle Sam to do it for them, they prefer independence.
If the GOP is at war with women, then this campaign is the most secretive effort ever put underway in the history of political strategy and the aforementioned ladies are all idiots.
Wow... didn't that choice just become crystal clear!