Republicans must treat women as equals
The media treated the “War on Women” as being primarily about reproductive issues, but not so the Obama campaign. Team Obama knew that the issue that women cared about the most was the economy, and reminded women constantly that the hostility the GOP shows toward the government could leave single women in a perilous situation. Republicans ridiculed “The Life of Julia,” but it was a brilliant campaign outreach tactic that showed how a Romney administration would affect women in a way that left nothing to the imagination.
Adding to the alienation of women voters this year were deeply troubling comments from GOP Senate candidates about rape, a tirade by Rush Limbaugh calling a woman a slut for testifying about the availability of birth control, and so on. …
A constant cry from the right is that Democrats “talk down” to women and appeal to their emotions, especially with unmarried women. Ironically, their claims of condescension are condescending themselves. The real reason that unmarried women prefer the Democratic Party over the Republican Party is because they don’t have a spouse to help carry the load, so the government becomes the only safety net they have, and they view it as a good in the world. They live with an economic vulnerability that most men and even many married women will never experience. If they lose their job, their children don’t eat—unless, of course, the government provides them with some help. They aren’t “moochers,” they aren’t “sluts” for having out-of-wedlock sex, and they aren’t dummies driven by emotion.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
So, the new line will be, “I am no moocher, I’m economically vulnerable.”
Ira on November 9, 2012 at 9:12 AM
KP would much rather be told that her only value is what he has between her legs, and vote, campaign and lobby as such.
Republicans, on the other hand, value EVERYTHING a woman has to contribute to society.
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 9:13 AM
Hey let’s subsidize something constantly cited as being a major issue in the african american community! That should solve the problem.
Dash on November 9, 2012 at 9:13 AM
I would also suggest they are not moochers. Moochers ask for things, the Democrats are pushers. Offering it to whoever will pay the price: their vote.
Dash on November 9, 2012 at 9:14 AM
Sorry Ms. Powers, the issue is special interest groups and the failing of the media, in general, to be objective. Women are a special interest group, according to you, and should be manipulated.
Vince on November 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM
KP would much rather be told that her only value is what he has between her legs, and vote, campaign and lobby as such.Republicans, on the other hand, value EVERYTHING a woman has to contribute to society.
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 9:13 AM
I assume you don’t recognize the irony of unleashing such a breathtakingly sexist bit of verbiage and then claiming that you value women.
urban elitist on November 9, 2012 at 9:15 AM
Having Ryan on the ticket hurt in this regard since he had worked with Akin on abortion legislation.
dedalus on November 9, 2012 at 9:17 AM
“I got 99 problems but a biotch ain’t one!”
Lyrics from some white dude singer who supported Romney, proof that he was a classless candidate who hates women.
Bishop on November 9, 2012 at 9:18 AM
Oh? The left courted women on more than “Romney’s taking away your free birth control and abortions!!”
Did the left even make an effort to talk about the price of food, gas, increased tax burdens or ANY of the issues that affect the ENTIRETY of America (which would include women)?
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 9:19 AM
Haha…terrified that you claim to be a parent. Let me send you the pics of leftist women dressing up as vaginas in “protest”. Please explain the “irony” while I start digging up quotes from your side concerning Sarah Palin. You teach your kids to lie like that? Of course you do…you are a progressive.
ClassicCon on November 9, 2012 at 9:21 AM
Now you’ve got it!
Just as terrorism became “man-caused disasters” and the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi became “Life-challenged former citizens”.
Bishop on November 9, 2012 at 9:21 AM
In case I wasn’t clear for people like Urban:
The right talks about issues in terms of their affect on the nation as a whole – on ALL Americans.
The left talks about issues one demographic bloc at a time, and pits them against ‘the enemy’ who votes differently than they.
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 9:22 AM
Democrats must treat women as something other than walking vaginal units.
Glenn Jericho on November 9, 2012 at 9:23 AM
Sorry, I can’t get passed seeing Powers with Anthony Weiner…
Caper29 on November 9, 2012 at 9:24 AM
So what is a slut then? Or are women incapable of being sluts? Anyone who’s out in the dating world would laugh at the idea that women aren’t slutty. c’mon now.
IR-MN on November 9, 2012 at 9:27 AM
Apparently America thinks we addressed those issues well enough. We took Senate seats, too.
But, if you want an apology for running an effective campaign, I suspect you look elsewhere. Women get to decide what’s important to them, not you.
And, it’s not as though the GOP doesn’t do the same thing – gun owners, evangelicals, service members….you just do it poorly.
But back to your earlier comment, yo
urban elitist on November 9, 2012 at 9:30 AM
I’m so embarrassed by my gender at times. I just can’t relate to these helpless, whiney women who depend on the government. It’s sickening. I vow to raise our three girls to be strong, independent conservative women.
NebCon on November 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM
Whatever. Make me a sandwich, woman.
cat-scratch on November 9, 2012 at 9:35 AM
Everyone knows what a family is and that it is best for a child. The government is not a family member.
BullShooterAsInElk on November 9, 2012 at 9:36 AM
I started to read this, but I couldn’t get past her assertion that “The Life of Julia” was a brilliant campaign outreach tactic.
To argue that the media made the “war on women” about reproductive issues, but the Obama campaign didn’t and was focused on economic issues related to women… can this woman be for real? Did she actually watch the Democratic National Convention? The one that we all lovingly refer to as “abortion-palooza”?
The Obama campaign made their appeal to women about nothing BUT so-called “reproductive issues.” They reduced all women voters to nothing but sex objects concerned about nothing but being able to pursue their sex lives without responsibility or consequence. It was the most offensive approach to women that I’ve ever seen a campaign take.
Shump on November 9, 2012 at 9:37 AM
Uh KP, I am absolutely sure that free birth control or abortion on demand will do nothing to fix this.
Jabberwock on November 9, 2012 at 9:38 AM
If these women she describes aren’t moochers, then what are they? Why can’t they support themselves like responsible adults? Because they have kids? I’m sorry ladies, but your kids are you and your man’s responsibility, not mine. If you have a kid with someone who won’t support you, go live with your Mom and Dad – let them finance your bad decisions. And here’s a hint: aborting the kid isn’t a moral solution either.
Dork B. on November 9, 2012 at 9:39 AM
So there’s that…
gatorboy on November 9, 2012 at 9:43 AM
It’s policy that affects women’s bodies. It’s not surprising that it would factor into their decision.
dedalus on November 9, 2012 at 9:43 AM
Sorry. Obama avoided these issues entirely. And he did a fine job of it as well. Identity politics can be an effective way of avoiding the larger issues. Unfortunately, the problem will not be going away anytime soon.
Jabberwock on November 9, 2012 at 9:45 AM
And how has the treatment of Palin worked out for them so far…
http://conservatives4palin.com/2012/11/mark-levin-discusses-the-gops-treatment-of-governor-palin-romney-vote-totals.html
ChuckTX on November 9, 2012 at 9:48 AM
No, it has no effect on women’s bodies what-so-ever. The only thing it effects is who carries financial responsibility for the decisions women make. That’s an entirely different issue.
Shump on November 9, 2012 at 9:51 AM
Democrats advised women to vote with their genitalia but it’s the Republicans who need to treat women as equals.
CrustyB on November 9, 2012 at 9:55 AM
Many, many, single women think EXACTLY like this. Now, we as conservatives can realize it and address how to reach these women or we can sit here and make fun of them for thinking that way. It really comes down to one or the other.
GiantOrb on November 9, 2012 at 9:55 AM
The only thing I was reading and hearing from the left during this “War on Women” was birth control, abortion on demand and I want others to pay for it.
As far as the “Life of Julia”, she had no life! Julia’s whole existance revolved around the government. There were no family, friends, nothing but what the government could provide for her at the expense of others.
And as far as treating women as equals, look in the mirror. I’ve known many women in my lifetime who have owned their own business and they talk the talk, but they don’t pay women the equal amount they would pay a man. Period.
So, shut up Kirsten.
moonsbreath on November 9, 2012 at 10:03 AM
That’s precisely my point.
Women decided that their reproductive organs were more important to them than any combination of economic issues.
How is pointing that out horrific and sexist?
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 10:04 AM
Thanks for the link..:)
idesign on November 9, 2012 at 10:13 AM
Reproduction has a huge impact on women’s bodies. At least my wife thinks so. Having a baby also changes your life forever. Most women want some control over that.
dedalus on November 9, 2012 at 10:22 AM
No, they are just irresponsible idiots who dropped their ovaries for scumbucket men who wouldn’t stick around to help them raise their children. Damn I don’t feel a bit sorry for women who get stuck with children with a bad baby daddy. YOU picked him you twit.
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Might as well admit that not only single women but a substantial majority of the electorate have about as much use for limited government as the typical ten year old has for broccoli.
Seth Halpern on November 9, 2012 at 10:25 AM
Yeah sweetie the control comes from birth control which was never in jeopardy. What the Dems sold “womyn” was free stuff as much as if we were handing food stamps, welfare etc.
And BTW, eating and shelter is a BIGGER life need than reproduction and apparently women don’t care about that.
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:28 AM
No. Most women want control, and someone else to pay for it, as evidenced by this election.
Not too many people argue a woman shouldn’t have control. What we’re arguing is that if you shoulder the burden of decision-making, you also shoulder the burden of financing your decisions.
What’s your problem with that?
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 10:28 AM
WOW – as a single unmarried woman I find this article offensive.
I have worked since I was 13 and put myself through school. I have never depended on the government for a dime.
I guess I’m really in the minority status now.
gophergirl on November 9, 2012 at 10:29 AM
^ This a million times this!
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:29 AM
You are an intelligent informed voter which means you were already in the minority.
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:30 AM
It’s interesting that amidst all this equality talk, the only group Powers associates this unique economic vulnerability to is single women…even when compared to single men, who also don’t have spouses.
Also, apparently, it’s condescending to see such a singling-out as an exposure of the patronizing, intellectual laziness of ardent feminism.
BlueCollarAstronaut on November 9, 2012 at 10:31 AM
See, and all this time, you could have been raking in free money.
All it would have cost if your pride, your work ethic, your morals and your dignity.
In other words, to a lib, not much.
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 10:34 AM
I just hate being lumped into a group with all these helpless women. I hate that people look at me and think I’m someone who can’t cross the street without the government telling her what to do.
Bothers me if you can’t tell.
gophergirl on November 9, 2012 at 10:35 AM
People pay for their health insurance. It’s the government that forces them to take part of their compensation in premiums rather than cash. In the process, young people are forced to subsidize the medical expenses of the elderly. It isn’t unreasonable for them to want some of their medical expenses covered in return.
dedalus on November 9, 2012 at 10:36 AM
I know how you feel. I am not unmarried, but I don’t understand this at all. Women fought so that they could show how strong they are and yet this is the progress we have made- so strong that we have to rely on the government to take care of our sex life, and our children. Apparently we went from one owner “men” to another “government.”
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:37 AM
So essentially “other people are getting paid, I have to get mines”… And that is in a nutshell the attitude that drove Obama to win the election.
melle1228 on November 9, 2012 at 10:38 AM
You aren’t asking for ‘some of their medical expenses’ to be covered, you’re demanding that all of them be covered, while at the same time, demanding that rates not increase to account for this.
It is an empirical fact that population growth has slowed radically. There are fewer young to pay for more elderly. As the boomers age, this disparity will only become more exaggerated.
How can you decrease the number of people paying in, increase the procedures, pills and visits which become free, and NOT increase premiums?
Besides, you guys are the ones screaming about how we all need to sacrifice for the good of the nation.
Start sacrificing.
Washington Nearsider on November 9, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Are you really this stupid? Do you think inexpensive car owners are forced to subsidize repair costs for owners of expensive cars, too?
Learn something about free market insurance before you make silly comments.
It isn’t unreasonable for them to seek a free market solution for this. It IS socialism for them to want the government to stupidly mandate it.
blink on November 9, 2012 at 10:47 AM
So I have to treat you as “equals” by supporting free sh*t for you that I’ll have to pay for?
I, as a man don’t deserve free sh*t, but as an “equal” you must have it?
Can I borrow your dictionary so I can look up “equal” and see what the hell you mean by that word? My dictionary doesn’t have a definition where that word makes any sense in the context you’re using.
If you want equality, why can’t you pay a co-pay on your prescription? What exactly does “equality” have to do with giving you special rights?
I guess I don’t understand; I really would like your definition of that word… maybe then it’ll make sense.
gekkobear on November 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Btw, do you understand the purpose of a copay?
blink on November 9, 2012 at 10:48 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »