Republicans Have Plan to Get Hillary Elected

One can only assume that the Republicans of South Dakota are gunning to get Hillary Rodham elected President. Whatever your view is on abortion, if you are a Republican, you have to believe that Sout Dakota’s move to outlaw abortion has got to be about the dumbest political move for a party to have made in the past century.

Perhaps Gov. Mike Rounds (R) will ruin his career but save his party’s chances to when the 2008 Presidential election by vetoing the SD state legislature’s bill. That’s not likely though.

The next step will be a court challenge. It will not take long to make its way to the US Supreme Court and they won’t be able to skirt it. It’s no mystery that the current Court will not uphold Roe.

Hillary Rodham must be licking her chops. A majority of Americans would prefer that Roe stand. So Hillary Rodham will not only have that working in her favor, but also the ire of moderate female voters who will not be happy with the idea of fat white bastards telling them what they can and cannot do regarding pregnancy and abortion. We can also expect Republicans to loose their majority in the Senate and perhaps even the House.

The fall-out of Roe being overturned will be sad for the country for several reasons:

First, the current gender feminist waged war on men, boys, and fathers will pick up steam like never before. If you think the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is bad, wait ‘till you see what Hillary Rodham has in store for us.

Over time, the country will become more geographically polarized. Abortion is a “litmus test” issue. Since the overthrow of Roe will put it back to the states to determine their own abortion laws, some will keep it legal, some will not. In the end, Democrats will tend to congregate even more in blue states and conservatives even more in red states. The rest of us won’t have much chance of finding a place to live that has some political balance anywhere in the country.

Perhaps the worst outcome will be that the current batch of idiots in Washington might reopen the Constitution for amendments. Even those in favor of abortion have to admit that Roe was always on shaky Constitutional grounds. With abortion back in the hands of states, a federal law on the matter would make little difference. State’s rights will trump any federal abortion law, no matter how well crafted. So, that leaves only a Constitutional amendment to legalize abortion throughout the land.

That certainly would be a scary thought for everyone that is anti-abortion. But, it should also be a scary thought for anyone that cares about the country and its Constitution. Contemporary politicians are not even a shadow of the giants that formed this country. Once the Constitution has been opened up for amendments, Hillary and Co. will not stop at legalizing abortion. A Constitutional debate among the current crop of politicians might lead anywhere, but the likely result will be a country that has little respect for individual liberty.

For a classically liberal individual like me, that is a nightmare scenario. I'm no fan of abortion, but I care more about individual rights and liberty than any other issue. Because it was such a poorly crafted decision, it has always been inevitable that Roe would be overturned. But, Republicans did not have to move this fast to make so.

As Alan Greenspan pointed out in a speech recently, the political terrain is ripe for a third party. His argument was that the two political parties are way out on the extremes, while most of the American public lumps in the middle. Actually, I'd go a step further and say that, except on a couple of issues, the two political parties look more alike than ever. They both are interested in controlling as many aspects of our lives and decisions as possible.

Only a third party can save us from this mess. Obviously, with the rigged political system we live under, it's not likely to emerge.

Click here for more.

P is for Perjury

This is going to be a short post, because I want to go lie in a comfy bed with my beloved.

But not long ago, I wrote a response in a court matter. In NJ, when you make a motion (I did) you write the motion, and then the other side responds with a 'certification' and then you get a chance to write once more to say what is wrong with their argument.

As the other side was my ex, almost everything she said was a documentable lie. What is amusing of course is that the certification ended with (as they all do) a statement about how she is aware that if she has willfully lied, she is subject to punishment.

As I recall, there were about 10 things in her certification that were major, documented, already-proved-in-a-court-of-law kind of items that were lies.

So what I did in my responding certification was that I documented them, and asked for some of that promised punishment.

I attached copies of paystubs, of prior court orders, of letters, of receipts of all kinds of things -
-of all the evidence that showed that my ex continues to spend her spare time creating lies and presenting them to the court, and I asked for some punishment for her for committing perjury.

This might be a good time to mention that the point of the motion was to protect me and my new sweetie from the prediations of the ex, and that I was asking for the judge to put some strong punishments in place if she committed certain crimes against me or my sweetie yet again.

My ex's lawyer was insisting that all that was needed to protect me was for my ex to promise that she understood that if she committed these various crimes, she would be 'subject to punishment'. Exactly the same wording that ends a certification.

My response to the judge was on the order of 'that kind of a guarantee is worth less than the ink that it takes to print it'.

• Do you think that my ex was punished for her multiple counts of perjury?
• Do you think that I was provided with any more protection than her being 'aware' that she might be subject to punishment?
• Do you think that she has even the slightest concern about what will happen to her if she breaks the law and violates my rights again?
• Do you think that a man's rights count for anything against a woman in this country?

The answer to all four questions is 'NO'.

I'm off to snuggle.

My best to you in your struggles

-M

(simulposted on MIsForMalevolent)

Click here for more.

Mothers Should Stand Up for their Sons

According to a recent study, members of Congress who have daughters tend to vote more liberally on so-called women’s issues. In particular, they tend to vote against restrictions on abortions.

If only the mothers of sons would do the same. And, for the record, let’s make it clear that voting to restrict abortion is not a men’s issue.

Some issues that mothers in Congress with sons or even regular mothers who exercise their right to vote should include:

An improved educational environment for boys in public schools. This should include working to abolish the current system that seems to punish boys for being male.

Reworking Title IX so that it is no longer a quota system and takes into account the large number of student athletes on football teams. Men’s rowing, wrestling, and gymnastics teams around the country have been eliminate for not other reason than to make sure the number of women participating in college sports is equal to the number of men.

Elimination of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) and especially the “date rape” provision in the new version of this hateful legislation. Mother’s of sons should make no mistake about the fact that the date rape provision of VAWA puts teenage boys at extreme risk.

Pushing for shared custody of children in a divorce and eliminating or greatly restructuring the current child support system.

Outlawing the use of ADHD drugs to treat boys for behaving like what they are, boys. Only in the most extreme cases should a boy ever be given a drug like Ritalin and even then it should be last resort and used for only a limited period of time.

Conducting a detailed investigation and research into why teenage boy suicide is 5 times what it is for teenage girls.

Pushing for military draft for women, as we currently have for men. And, pushing the military to put women into more combat roles, preferable in equal percentages as men.

There are plenty of other policies (or elimination of policies) that you may think of, so please feel free to add them to the comments.

Click here for more.

So Long My Valentine

The Seattle Times tries to do a service to all of us singles out there just before Valentines Day by giving stories of couples hooking up. This must make Eve Ensler’s Seattle followers of the Vagina Cult rabid. They are busy trying to supplant what was once a day to celebrate love with their Vagina Monologue darkness.

People do keep hooking up, even if they have to overcome the risk of rejection. For men, though, there is an additional risk that makes many hesitate if not completely abort before making a commitment. These days, the feminist state is actively working to free women and girls from the oppression of the patriarchy. There is no such thing as “the patriarchy” of course, so that means that the state is simply attacking boys, men, and the institution of marriage at every opportunity.

The evidence is everywhere. Almost 50% of men in their thirties in King County have never been married. That is a perfectly rational response to the risk of loosing your economic and physical freedom that a relationship now poses for all men.

Since men are turning their noses up at marriage, and keeping the fruits of their labor to themselves, the feminist state has taken another tact: it is getting harder to get at the resources of men through marriage and children, so the feminist state has decided to attack men while they are still boys. The next generation of men are getting shortchanged in public schools, denied the opportunity to go to college, and prepared for an adulthood of second-class citizenship.

Even teenage love has been criminalized, at least for the male side of the equation, as the new version of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has dedicated huge sums of federal dollars to "solve" an exagerated problem of "date rape." In other words, any girl that has second thoughts about necking with your teenage son will be encouraged to accuse him of rape; after that, he will be guilty until proven innocent or, in other words, guilty of being a boy. It's now important for all parents to teach their boys that "no" means no, "yes" means no, and any forward advance by a teenage girl should be treated with extreme caution if not outright rejected.

Sadly, that leaves the perception that suicide as about the only option left to achieve freedom. Teenage boys and adult men are taking that option at alarming rates.

Valentines Day used to be fun. It was a day for many people to celebrate the fact that they had found love and a day for the rest to be reminded that a loving relationship is the best way for a human to find happiness. Lately though, the forces of darkness have been winning, and Valentines Day is left as nothing more than a reminder of how cynical and disaffected forces can ruin just about anything.

Click here for more.

Mother of NOW is Past

Betty Friedan, arguably the mother of contemporary feminism, died on Saturday at the age of 85. Ironically, it was just one day before the Super Bowl, a day around which the inheritors of Friedan’s feminine cult movement created the myth that women around the country were suffering domestic violence.

Betty started the whole thing with a book called The Feminine Mystique that she wrote in 1963. In it, she claimed that women suffered from a "nameless, aching dissatisfaction" that she called "the problem that has no name." She based this “research finding” on a survey of her classmates at her college reunion. Thus began the practice by so-called scholars in Women Studies departments in universities around the country of using anecdotal evidence (e.g., surveys not based on statistical sampling methods) to make broad assumptions.

She seemed to evolve from those early beginnings, however. She asserted that women should seek an independent identity but also work with men. She was shunned by her successors at NOW and other major women’s political groups as they adopted their current paranoid delusion of patriarchal “control and oppression.”

Click here for more.