Current Events, Just musing

“War on women” mantra emblematic of liberal mindset

Let’s start with this…Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO) said a really stupid thing.

This doesn’t mean Todd Akin is stupid; rather, he could not articulate his idea of life being sacred in an intelligent sounding way. Quoting some dubious scientific information and combining it with the term “legitimate rape” (as if there is an illegitimate rape) makes as much sense to me as the concept of committing a “hate crime.”  If I intend to harm you, what does it matter if it’s because I like you, are ambivalent toward you, or despise you?  Isn’t the end result the same?

Some areas of life, despite the rhetoric of the self-enlightened, all-inclusive, morally relative, free thinkers out there, are still black and white. You were either raped or you were not. You are either pregnant or you are not. There is no “somewhat” pregnant, “sorta” pregnant” or “just a little” pregnant.

This single utterance by a Republican politician has become the rallying cry of the left, who want to convince as many Americans as possible that a belief in smaller government, less spending, less burdens on small businesses and tax reform is part of a jihad on women. It’s as if a fatwa has been issued and anyone with an ‘R’ by their name is painted with this same broad brush.

This is absurd and the fact that the DNC is putting so many of its political eggs in one basket is equally absurd.

I am happily married to a wonderful, intelligent woman. I have four daughters — two in high school, one in middle school and one in elementary school. They are all straight A students. They are all involved in sports, music and extracurricular activities. My two oldest are now getting involved in the community through volunteering and public service.

Oh, and they are all conservative.

Am I to believe they suffer from self-loathing? Am I to believe I hate them and want to see them fail? Does my belief in individual freedom and liberty mean I want them subjugated and repressed? It defies logic and reason. If anyone uttering this nonsense would take a minute to exhibit a mote of intellectual honesty, they would recognize how ridiculous this assertion is.

Why is the DNC clinging to this like Leonardo DiCaprio on a piece of debris in the North Atlantic? Because, the leadership of the Democrat party knows touting the last four years of accomplishments is akin to rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

Today, we have more people on government assistance than we did just four years ago — over 100 million. We have had a longer stretch of “seasonally adjusted” unemployment of over 8% than any other time in the last 70 years. Gasoline prices averaged $2.77 a gallon nationwide in November of 2008 and are now $4.86 a gallon in August 2012, according to Food prices have also seen a similar jump. (How ironic that food and energy costs are excluded from inflation calculations, otherwise we’d be closing in on 11%. [¹]) For the first time in history, we have had over a trillion-dollar deficit for each year of our current President’s term, spending more in 3 years than his predecessor did in 8, with no signs of slowing. We are just beginning to implement Obama’s healthcare initiative that started off two years ago with a $900 billion price tag and has already mushroomed to almost three times that according to the Congressional Budget Office. And we know, according the CBO, the President did take $716 billion out of Medicare to help offset the cost of that healthcare bill. [²] This is just the tip of the same iceberg that will sink the United States if our course remains the same.

The DNC cannot risk discussing reality, so they have no choice but to side-step the topic of accomplishments and wage a holy war against the RNC by whatever means necessary, including this faux-war-on-women. They are clinging to results of a recent poll in a Quinnipiac University survey that showed single women favor Obama over Romney. With this information giving them a sign of hope, they will continue to do all they can to convince as many voters possible that the Romney-Ryan vote is a vote for misogyny — even if it means fabricating quotes as DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz recently did.

Ginning up this kind of rhetoric has fueled an already angry and emotional sub-component of the left. Even before the start of the RNC convention, social media exploded with hopes that tropical storm Isaac would wipe out the Republicans gathering in Tampa. Buildings around the event were found to have bricks, pipes and anarchist graffiti stocked by anti-Republican protestors. And, within 24 hours, an RNC protestor was arrested with a machete strapped to his leg.

Then as Isaac’s path moved westward away from Tampa, the actor, Samuel L. Jackson, tweeted how upset he was that the storm was going to spare the GOP. He said he didn’t understand why God would do that, choosing to target New Orleans instead. It didn’t matter that Tampa is a Democrat run city; it only mattered to see physical harm come to Republicans. In his mind, God is on his side and therefore, is supposed to smite his enemy. Similarly, the actress Ellen Barkin hoped the hurricane would kill ‘every pro-life, xenophobic, gay-bashing SOB’ at the RNC.

Liberals love their labels. It gives them tidy boxes to stack, divide, and categorize people. And let’s not forget that Barkin wasn’t going to be happy with tropical storm Isaac harming people, she wanted them dead.

Many who lean left pride themselves on being open-minded, civil, sophisticated, accepting of differences and sensitive to the notion that there are many shades of gray between right and wrong. It’s obvious this moral relativism only goes so far. If someone lives on the other side of the aisle, it’s no longer a matter of shades of gray; now, it’s a black and white issue with the end result being a wish for physical harm, if not death, to the person with an opposing belief system.

A belief in the individual over the group, of providing equal opportunity (not equal results) to all, of reducing the size and scope of government, of granting more personal liberty and less government intrusion, of showing reverence for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are inconceivable concepts to the left. They run contrary to their belief in big government, of growing social programs, and implementing a one-size-fits-all approach for control. That’s why they assign people into groups and categories. It’s how they justify their overbearing need to force Americans to conform to a preset path, which, in their infinite wisdom, is best for them. Each group is meant to behave a certain way with predefined characteristics. If an individual falls outside of that paradigm, they will be punished. Ask Clarence Thomas how he is treated for having a belief system different from what the left has ascribed for him?  The same applies to Allen West, Condoleezza Rice and Herman Cain.  The left has a box assigned to black Americans and any deviation is met with harsh consequences.

This is perhaps the most damning conceit driving the modern liberal. They pretend to be open to all views so long as those views don’t stray too close to the middle, let alone the right. And, if an individual believes they have a better idea on how to live, especially if it runs counter to the liberal/progressive agenda, they must be re-educated, ridiculed, harmed or destroyed. They proffer a mockery of choice that is as shallow and intellectually dishonest as telling a car buyer, “You can have any car you want so long as it’s this blue one.”

Wishing harm on people with opposing points of view, or worse, the death of fellow Americans, is not civility. But, such public statements are easy to recognize. The more nefarious display of a lack of civility from the left is their declaration of war on individual liberty and freedom under the guise of the magnanimity of Uncle Sam; to offer the facade of kindness while their fangs are bared behind their mask for any who dare think or act otherwise.

We are not a collective. It’s time for Americans to remember that our roots are planted deeply in the soil of freedom from oppression. A desire to control the populace, regardless of well-meaning intent, is to embrace the fundamental aspects of tyranny. It is no different from the period of time in our past when black Americans were thought inferior and thus “society” was doing them a favor by keeping them from advancing. Denying any individual the ability to pursue life, liberty, and happiness on their own terms is, not only uncivil, but also shows a flagrant disrespect for the ideals that inspired our Founding Fathers.

And you cannot get more anti-American than that.


[¹] The government used the same calculation for the CPI from 1913 to 1980. In 1980, after seeing inflation in late 1970s, the government changed the calculation and dropped food and energy from the Core Inflation Index. While the U.S. government repeatedly states that we currently [2011] have about 1% inflation, by using the older pre-1980 government calculation of inflation, we find that the true inflation rate is closer to 10.7% as of May 2011 based on the SGS “Alternate CPI” calculation.

[2] The CBO determined in 2011 that the federal health care law would reduce Medicare outlays by $507 billion between 2012 and 2021. In a more recent estimate released this year, the CBO looked at the years 2013 to 2022 and determined the health care law affected Medicare outlays by $716 billion.

9 thoughts on ““War on women” mantra emblematic of liberal mindset”

  1. you talk about a fatwa being issued against anyone with an r next to their name, but you seem to be issuing a fatwa against anyone who is a liberal or perhaps more accurately a democrat. you’re bashing liberals for stacking people into boxes and labels, but then you do that to them. you conveniently create a liberal straw man and then tear it to shreds. you start the column by pointing to a republican politician who said something that was really stupid and insensitive. you say that he should get a pass because he isn’t really stupid, he’s just inarticulate. then, later in the column, you jump all over so called liberals for saying stupid and insensitive things, but they shouldn’t get a pass because they are liberal?

    1. Thank you for your reply. I can see where my effort to illustrate hypocrisy of the modern liberal mindset falls into the view of “putting them in boxes” from your perspective. I feel it’s a bit of an apples-oranges retort in that I was speaking of all the individual groups, roles, and races that the left labels, usually with hyphenates, versus an ideology that cuts across all of those groups. Similarly, I could talk about all those individual sub-groups and view them through the prism of Christianity. Liberal does not equal Democrat; Conservative does not mean Republican. However, a lable is a lable so, at some level, if we zoom out far enough, there is some merit to your supposition.

      As to giving a pass to insensitive comments, surely you can see the difference between Akin uttering a stupid comment (one that I think deserved dropping out of his campaign — and never did I say he deserved a pass) versus wanting to physically harm and/or kill someone, don’t you? I would hope bringing machete’s and stocking rooftops with bricks and pipes to use on convention goers is never acceptable, regardless of ideology or political affiliation.

      And, I believe if you were to look at how Mia Love was treated after her speech at the RNC last night (, let alone the few examples I mentioned, I think you would find it evermore difficult to sustain this outrage.

      Regardless of our different beliefs, we appreciate your thoughts and really thank you for taking the time to engage in the conversation. Ultimately, that is at the very core of why we created Freedom Cocktail.


  2. As a member of the Libertarian Party, I am quite used to hearing about the quacks that show up at our conventions and run within our circles. We have our share of 9/11 Truthers and Birthers and chem-trail nuts. In fact, the media homes in on them and makes it look like us other LP members are just as much stooges.

    When I was younger at this game, I asked a ranking member in the LP how to address such things, he said, we all have our clowns…every party.

    Ted Bundy? Yeah, he was once the assistant chair to the Washington State Republican Party.

    John Wayne Gacy? He cleaned up the Democratic Party Headquarters in Norwood Park, IL, ended up on the Township Street Light Committee and even got a photo op with the then First Lady, Rosalynn Carter.

    Every party and group and gaggle and club and flock has their dumb-dumbs. Be smart enough to look past them and read the written positions of each group. That will give you a better idea on what the general concensus is among the members rather than what a few off the cuff, uneducated remarks are said and, possibly, taken out of context.

  3. Although the reply that Joe left is also poorly articulated, I feel as though this article does criticize the Democratic party for clinging to the “War on Women” because of the statements of one man who is an official representative for the Republican party and then immediately uses the Tweets of celebrities who are not official representatives for any party to paint “the modern liberal” or Democrats with a broad brush, as well. I also acknowledge that there are dangerous extremists on either side of the party lines, including those stockpiling weapons. I find that you are using the same tactics in your political artwork that you are criticizing in others and I reject that because other Democrats do or say these things that this Democrat-leaning moderate is the same as they are.

    Furthermore, though I hate the label “War on Women,” this part of your article seems to hinge on the idea that the “War on Women” is all about Representative Todd Akin’s statements about illegitimate rape, which he supplemented with vague “evidence” that “doctors told him.” It’s a little too convenient to forget that there are other issues going on with women and politics, including a few issues on birth control that don’t involve abortion.

  4. I want to start with once again thanking you for not only taking the time to read our blog, but also for taking the time to articulate your thoughts. We say this over and over — spurring discussion is the underlying goal of our blogsite. We have ideals rooted in a love of the Constitution as originally written and intended, the Bill of Rights, and the writings of the Founding Fathers so our blog will have a conservative voice. However, it may be of interest to you that Eric and I don’t always see eye-to-eye on every detail. And we woudln’t want it that way!

    I believe my premise, as I laid out, was to articulate how absurd it is for the DNC to be putting most of their political eggs in one basket with this idea of a war on women. I did not dredge up the flack of some women who believe they have a “right” to free contraceptives or to demand religious organizations provide services or products that are diametrically opposed to the tenets of their relgion. What would those same individuals say if there was a demand of Muslims to serve pork in their cafeterias?

    That horse had been fairly well kicked earlier this year (well before the launch of FC) and was less relevant to me. But, in bringing this topic up, I think it only reinforces my supposition that those on the left have no problem demanding other people give up their beliefs, including relgious traditions of thousands of years, while refusing to see how close-minded that position happens to be. Anyone who has a view against public funding of contraception or abortion are labled as part of the war on women — even if the person in opposition is a woman herself! It makes no sense.

    Personally, I have a fundamental issue with public tax dollars, money I am forced to relinquish at the point of a gun, used in a way that runs contrary to my moral core. I would never go so far as to suggest those services be eliminated because I do believe in liberty and freedom. My argument is against public funding. Would you be in favor of public funds being used to buy handguns for people who wanted to protect themselves? The same standards need to be applied in either direction.

    My goal was to show how ill-advised it is to comparmentalize Americans into so many sub-groups and demand they act a certain way and if they don’t they must be re-educated, ridiculed, harmed or destroyed. I made sure to point out four examples of conservative black Americans to illustrate this point. Had I waited just one additional day to post this blog, I could have added Mia Love from Utah to that list. It’s another “War on ______.” Just fill in the blank with the appropriate sub-group who refuses to follow the rules. Hence, my choice for the title of the blog.

    To address one other item from your comments, I didn’t lable moderates or “independents.” I specifically refered to the liberal mindset, which, whether you want to admit it or not, tend to be the loudest voices and get the most attention and are driving the agenda for the upcoming DNC convention. As you state, this happens on both sides of the aisle and, once again, must be acknowledge from either side.

    I can only tell you that I try very hard to be as specific as I can and I’m sure I will always fall short in some area. But I try.

    Hopefully this response will give you a little more insight into my thoughts. I would never want someone to follow anything we say blindly. I try to provide as many links to the information I use to show how I came to my conclusions. All we can hope for at Freedom Cocktail is to put forth an idea and let the individual decide for themselves if that idea has merit.

    Thank you again for taking the time to visit and contribute. We really appreciate it. I welcome your future comments, whether here or on future posts.

    1. To speak of public tax dollars being used for uses that go against my moral core, I could include the death penalty and torture/interrogation tactics. I have to deal with those things, as it is something that is going to happen whether I like it or not and that may have some good use to our country.

      Just as a person wishing to harm another is clearly more drastic than a politician making a slip-up, birth control is a far lesser danger than public funds purchasing handguns. Handguns and birth control are not comparable in my opinion. It is also true that women can be misogynists, based on a lifetime of living in a misogynistic world. No one is forcing people to TAKE birth control, only to provide whatever minuscule percentage of his or her tax dollars goes toward the realm of healthcare, which birth control falls under in many minds. The death penalty is abhorrent to me but I understand its history and place in the current legal system and therefore do not attempt to demand that my tax dollars stop paying for it.

      For many women, birth control is not just a contraceptive. There are many other hormonal processes that birth control pills can regulate, including the shrinking of cysts and tumors caused by hormonal imbalance, regulation of menstrual cycles, and treatment of endometriosis. Yes, I believe that is a part of basic healthcare for women, just as it was considered basic healthcare for my husband to receive hormone shots.

      Because this is bothering me, please allow me to elaborate on birth control. Instead of comparing handguns to birth control, let’s compare male hormones to female hormones. Testosterone shots often (but not always) cause a temporary chemical sterilization of the male when taken regularly. Female contraceptives usually (but not always) cause a temporary chemical sterilization of the female when taken regularly. Low testosterone can cause many health problems for men, including a risk for reproductive cancers, loss of muscle mass, fatigue, and moodiness. Low levels of hormones in women can cause reproductive cancers, loss of menstrual function (and therefore also sterilization), fatigue, bladder infection, and severe headaches. Testosterone therapy falls under the realm of basic healthcare for men and is not opposed by any religious group that I know of, despite the fact that it works as chemical sterilization in most cases. Why is it any different because it is a medical procedure for men that does practically the same thing, though has not been tested or proven as an official “contraceptive?”

      And to clarify, I enjoy reading FC. I really enjoy taking a step outside of my normal realm and taking the time to think about other points of view. The well-written posts are always thought-provoking, even if I don’t agree. I also really enjoy that there is a forum here for back and forth thoughts to be shared and politely debated. Thanks, FC!

  5. God (and I say that in the same way Richard Dawkins would), where to begin with this article? If I were anything like its author, I would reply with a straw man rebuttal, perhaps something like: “The average unemployment during Democratic presidents is 5.4%, during Republican presidents 5.9%.” Or something like, “People who are college educated tend to be Democrats.” But this would be silly, as the article starts off discussing Todd Akin’s remarks (though the article doesn’t actually quote them): “From what I understand from doctors, that’s really rare,” Akin said. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.” Then the article attempts to persuade us, the readers, that Akin is just bearing the brunt of a liberal drive to demonize the right, labeling the right’s crusade as an attack on women.

    Why oh why would a Democrat use such vitriolic language (lord knows the Republicans would never do such a thing!

    Let’s take a look at the RNC platform for 2012: (1) to make a constitutional amendment banning rape in all cases, including incest, rape, or even if the mother’s life is in danger (whatever happened to liberty, freedom fries and all that Republican progranda?);

    (2) Women cannot serve on the frontlines in the military;

    (3) Lesbians (and all gays for that matter) are forbidden to serve in the military and are forbidden to get married (interesting how Republicans tout limited government and freedom until it infringes upon their ideology).

    Let’s not also forget that Republicans have step forward in to repeal Lilly Ledbetter, a measure signed by Obama to help provide women with equal pay for equal work. This is exhausting. Ugh.

    So … War on Women? Perhaps not literally, but figuratively, yes.
    Now before I continue on with this message, I’d like to mention this: the author of this article needs to read a goddamn book. The fundamental problem with the internet is it allows ignorance to spread like the disease that it is.

    Small government? The Republican Party? “Since January 1961, federal, state and local government employment grew by 7.1 million under Republican presidents and 6.3 million when Democrats were in the White House.”

    Look, I’ll be honest: I don’t have the energy to go point by point through this article and poke out the billion holes within it. For example, it makes it seem as though the president controls gas prices? And duh, with rising gas prices food prices will rise also. Ignorance is bliss. Ugh. DO YOUR RESEARCH. Under the current administration US oil drilling has expanded. Honestly, I’m starting to wonder if Alan Sanders isn’t secretly an internet troll. And how does one’s daughters’ conservative principles build any level of legitimacy? If you were Christian, they’d probably be Christian also. If you were vegetarian, they’d probably be vegetarian. Why does this matter? Indoctrination starts at the home.

    Here’s an article illustrating how government has shrunk under the current presidency:

    This article here on Freedom Cocktail is a giant, stinking heap of Fox News talking points. Straw man after straw man. As an aside: man, Repubs love their buzzwords, don’t they? “Freedom.” Makes you feel good. Patriotic. No damn Kenyan is going to give you freedom, that’s for sure! Only thing that secret Muslim Obama will do is take away yer guns, durka, durka. Again, another example of the bullshit spin the right spews out, yet gun rights have expanded under Obama.

    And by the way you can get more “anti-American than that,” when your party pledges vows to make President Obama a one-term president just days after he’s in office. Whatever happened to country first? My ass.

    1. Dang. I was so angry. The RNC platform is to ban “abortion,” not “rape.” Well, I hope they’d be for banning rape.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s