I’m an Air Force wife and am devasted by how many liberal military wives there are. I don’t get it. I don’t think women have learned how to think. I cannot begin to explain why so many American women are liberals.

All I can hope for is that all the dumb broads who were going to vote for Hillary just because she has boobs will now vote for Palin. I love Palin, but not because she’s a woman, but because she talks like Ronald Reagan and is the best thing McCain has going for him right now.

China is coming under some criticism for its policiy of terminating female employees when they become pregnant. But actually the Chinese are correct. Baby making is not a job function-and should not be tolerated on the company’s time. Women forget that when they first entered the job market en masse in the late 1960’s that one of the big objections to letting them in was that they would disrupt the workplace by making babies on the company’s time. They swore that motherhood was obsolete in an overcrowded world and that they would never do any such thing. They lied. The issue of “pregnancy discrimination” inverts the issue. It is actually the pregnant female who is discriminating against the other employees who must do the extra work.
>
> We should return to the old system of hiring men only, paying the man enough money to support a wife and several children, and letting the woman reproduce on her own time. That way, men can get the job done without unnecessary disruption-and the woman can do what she is supposed to be doing-making babies and raising them-in the kitchen and bedroom where all women belong.

Again, these are NOT my words.

“Sexual harassment” is another illustration of the nonsense which comes from giving women “rights” and allowing them to intrude where they do not belong. Naturally, women cannot understand that their own behaviour is to blame. To illustrate that women are the problem, let us simply reverse the behaviour of the genders.

The male secretaries of the 1960’s trot off to work in their micro-mini-skirts, their see thru jock straps and their Playgirl stag ears. They screw their female bosses because that is the “in thing”, stick their tongue up every vg in sight and turn the business office into a whorehouse. Women, confronted with this obscene behaviour, quickly reach the conclusion that male secretaries are sex objects. They pat the male secretaries on the butt, tickle their testicles and hike up their skirts to demand that their male secretaries “give it” to them. The male secretaries stop licking p**** and snivel that they are being “sexually harassed”. Naturally, the idiotmale secretaries see no correlation between their own obscene behaviour and their seil-created problem.

“Spousal rape””is a perfect illustration of the nonsense women have been getting away with since gaining the vote. The basic idea is that a wife should be paid for her sexual services without having to perform them. It is a little bit like going to a prostitute, having the prostitute take your money and then tell you: ” I’ll keep the cash but I don’t feel like it tonight. Come back in ten days and then I will give you what you paid for.” That would be an unsuccessful prostitute indeed.

“Spousal rape” wives want one-half of everything as the price of their exclusive sexual services but do not want the obligation to perform if they are not in the mood. They are no different from the prostitute who wants the money without the performance upon demand obligation. The prostitute is, in a very real sense, a better deal than a wife. If a man goes to a prostitute, he gets what he pays for. If a man marries a “spousal rape” wife, he pays for what he doesn’t get.

In response to all the brainwashed feminists who think that men have been “discriminating” against them., I will pose the issue in these terms. Visualize 1950’s America where women work to support their male house husbands. (A man’s place is in the home, obviously.) Women give it all away to men in divorce court and pay massive child support and alimony to automatic custody fathers. Women fight and die for their country in Korea and Vietnam while men stay home and drink tea with the boys. Women go down with the Titanic while men and children climb on the life boats. (Women are the disposable sex; men are eternal and must be preserved.) Women work themselves into heart attacks at work so that men can outlive women by eight years and inherit 74% of the wealth of the country. I

n 1963., a revolutionary book, “The Male Mystique”. appears on the market by a closet communist, Betty Friedan, claiming that the male suburban house husband is really living in a camoflauged Auschwitz concentration camp. Men should “liberate” themselves from female oppression and pursue careers in adition to “men and babies first”. Women, who have the brains which men lack, can see that this is all utter nonsense. All the real “sex discrimination” is in favor of men. Men are not going to have all the jobs in addition to all their other goodies. Women put their foot down. They make it clear to men that men do not deserve the same pay as women because they do not have to support the opposite sex and pay child support and alimony like women do. Men will not be allowed to get away with their scam.

That is the exact nonsense which women have had poured into their numb skulls for the past forty years. It was a lie from the beginning; it is a lie now.

I have asked him twice now to post his comments on my new blog, rather than the old one. He has issued four comments. Here is the first one.

There was tremendous opposition from women themselves to men giving them the vote. Helen Kendrick Johnson in the United States was one; Gertrude Bell in England was another. When women got the vote, the first thing they did was to impose Alcohol Prohibition on the nation. That was an exercise in female statesmanship long since forgotten by feminists who claim that women will improve the world. All women are not necesarily irrational anymore than all men are necessarily sensible. But the net effect of giving women the vote has been to downgrade the intelligence of an already thoroughly dumbed down population.

Women forget that it was not their blood which was shed at Valley Forge and Yorktown winning American independence. They assume that they are entitled, merely by virtue of being one-half the population, to said right. Perhaps women should shed their blood for the next two hundred years while pondering whether conbat exempt male suffragettes should have the vote. The web site author is quite correct that there is a correlation between the gigantic growth in government spending post-1920’s and the granting of female suffrage. Women tend to believe that citizens are children in need of “Mother State” to take care of them. We would all be better off if women attended to their biological functions and stopped presuming to functions for which the vast majority of them have neither the intellectual capacity nor inclination. Those women who were intelligent in the days of the suffragettes were adamantly against the folly of granting votes to women. They have been confirmed a thousand times over since Alcohol Prohibition.

You lump women together as if all women - or all men - are identical in thought, personality, preference, morals, etc.

People are not one dimensional as you try to paint her to be. Are you saying that she has never done a single good, honest act in her life - either as a woman, mother, wife, or politician? I think there is a serious case of MISOGYNY happening here in American politics.

In the press Obama can do no wrong - Hillary can do no right. But since this is not a landslide for Obama I would say that there are a lot of people who support and believe in Hillary Clinton.

New Hampshire is going to do a hand recount of the primary votes this hasn’t happened since 1980 in New Hampshire. What if they find out Obama really won?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080111/ap_po/new_hampshire_recount_2