Bloodthirsty Liberal

Just catching up on some unfinished business, we reported on Arlen Specter’s (D-PA) appalling behavior toward Michele Bachmann the other day.

Well, give him credit, he apologized:

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) has apologized to Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) for telling her to “act like a lady” during a debate over healthcare.

Specter called Bachmann last night and apologizes, Bachmann’s office tells MinnPost.com.

“He called her last night on her cell phone, he apologized for his comments, and she accepted,” said Bachmann spokesman Dave Dziol.

Here’s some background on the controversy:

A radio debate between Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter (D) and Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann (R) on Thursday grew especially heated when the senator told the conservative congresswoman she ought to “act like a lady.”

As Bachmann finished describing tax policies she would ideally pursue in 2010, Specter began his response, criticizing the congresswoman for dodging the original question. That discussion became tense, as Bachmann continued to talk over Specter, prompting the Pennsylvania senator to charge: “Now wait a minute. I’ll stop and you can talk… I’ll treat you like a lady. So act like one.”

“I am a lady,” Bachmann replied.

I am heartened that my appeal to NOW (or NAG, as Rush calls them: National Association of Gals) to set aside political differences and condemn such sexist and bullying behavior moved them to release a state—… what’s that?

They didn’t? They didn’t do a thing?

But NOW has an urgent action page—they call it Hot Topics (but when you put women and hot in the same sentence I get a little distracted).

What is so pressing to push obnoxious, belittling behavior by a man toward a woman off the table?

CBS to Air Anti-Abortion Ad During Super Bowl

If that means one single GoDaddy internet ad featuring the girl with the enormous boobs is bumped off the broadcast (get it?), NOW’s outrage and high dudgeon will be nothing next to mine.

Lose a truck or beer ad—but don’t touch the GoDaddy Girl.

What else is on their minds?

Celebrating 37 Years of Roe v. Wade: NOW Asserts that Abortion Care is a Human Right

Marking 37 Years of Roe v. Wade: A Year Marked With Tragedy and Restrictions On Abortion Care

Abortion is great, got it. I wish I could have one myself. But surely the National Organization for Women defines itself more broadly (get it?) than just terminating the lives of unborn babies?

Mad As Hell and Not Going to Take It Anymore!

All right, girls! Now, you’re talking! What’s got your panties in a bunch? Specter’s treatment of Bachmann? Obama’s of Hillary? Obama’s of “Sweetie”?

Tell members of your congressional delegation that throwing women under the bus in health care reform legislation is not acceptable. Contrary to what women’s advocates have repeatedly been told, it now appears health care legislation allows gender rating after all. This, coupled with the anti-abortion rights language and other problems, renders the bill not worth passing unless these harmful provisions are removed.

Oh, for pete’s sake! It’s all abortion all the time with you people. If guys think only about sex, NOW members think only about offing the offspring.

How tiresome.

All I can say is, what took ‘em so long?

[NOW President Terry O’Neill] said the “male-dominated Democratic Party” is not doing women any favors by bringing in anti-abortion zealots,” slamming Nelson and Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), who amendment to restrict abortion coverage in the House health bill passed minutes before the final vote.

“Women are clearly harmed” by these lawmakers, O’Neill said. “Shame on the male-dominated Democratic Party for supporting them. They hold themselves out as the party that is women-friendly; well they’re not acting like it.”

“And that has a lot to do with why Martha Coakley lost this election,” O’Neill alleged, explaining the Democrats’ loss of Ted Kennedy’s seat with an argument that few others have made.

…

The National Organization for Women (NOW) harbors deep concerns with the Senate health legislation, and exclaims that “women will be better off with no bill whatsoever.”

“The Senate bill contains such fierce anti-abortion language, and there are other problems from the point of view of women,” NOW’s President Terry O’Neill told Raw Story in an interview.

O’Neill said NOW “will not support candidates in 2010 if they vote for it.”

So, NOW loves Scott, in other words, because he won’t vote for the bill. Who doesn’t love him? Especially among the frisky fillies at NOW?

Here’s some catnip for you, gals!

Only a few hours ago, I asked when NOW would condemn Arlen Specter’s outrageous Archie-Bunker-stifle-yourself-Edith moment with Michele Bachmann.

I knew better than to hold my breath. I should have known they’d waste theirs.

With the Obama administration set to consign women in their 40s to increased rates of breast cancer, and the left-wing media objectifying Sarah Palin’s admittedly objet d’art body, I’m sure our sisters at the National Organization for Women are full of piss and vinegar at the appalling treatment of women by the left.

What are the Hot Topics today, gals? Appropriate medical care for all women? Denouncing sexism in the media? Do tell:

NOW to Rally in Pitts’ Pennsylvania District to Denounce Stupak-Pitts Amendment

Tell Your Senators to Vote Against ‘Hyde on Steroids’

NOW Urges the Obama Administration to Prosecute Roeder Under Domestic Terrorism

NOW Opposes Health Care Bill That Strips Millions of Women of Abortion Access: Says Bill Obliterates Women’s Fundamental Right to Choose

NOW Vows to Press Forward After Fairness Defeated in Maine, Cheers Victory in Washington State

Four headlines about abortion and one about gay marriage.

All they have to say about the state of women today seems to come down to rejecting and denying anything that biologically defines the female sex. I’m not saying women have to have babies, but no one else can; nor am I saying they have to marry men, but it’s the primary method of reproduction. Under the heading of reproductive rights, NOW takes a scorched shirt—sorry, scorched earth attitude toward anything to do with limits on abortion.

Which is fine, even if I disagree. But NOW is in no way a national organization for women, or anyone else; it is a national organization for abortion. To say otherwise ignores all the evidence to the contrary. Women’s rights don’t mean equal access to health care, they don’t oppose cheesecake shots on national “news” magazine covers. They just mean the free and unfettered right to abort a fetus.

You’ve some a long way, baby.

One has to go to Rush Limbaugh to get the real story:

‘I am appalled and horrified,’ says Dr. David Dershaw, director of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City in response to the new guidelines. ‘There is no doubt that mammography screening in women in their 40s saves lives. To recommend that women abandon that is absolutely horrifying to me.’” Hello, Obamacare. Here you have a government panel upping the age of mammograms to 50. This is the beginning of rationed care….

I’m glad so many feminist women are open-minded enough to see the difference between rape and “rape rape”, as Whoopi Golberg put it.

So, they’re okay with this:

[W]e’re reprising the harrowing 1977 grand jury testimony of the 13-year-old California girl with whom the director had sex after plying her with Champagne and a Quaalude at the Los Angeles home of Jack Nicholson. … In graphic testimony, Samantha Gailey described the illicit encounter with Polanski, which began with her posing naked in a Jacuzzi for him as he purportedly snapped photos for French Vogue. From there, Polanski approached her in a bedroom of Nicholson’s Mulholland Drive home and, despite her demands that he “keep away,” sought to kiss Gailey. The teenager, an aspiring model, testified that Polanski, 43 at the time, later performed a sex act on her and “started to have intercourse with me.” She also testified that Polanski “put his penis in my butt” after asking her, “Would you want me to go in through your back?”

Hey, at least he asked.

Let’s look at a little of Ms. Gailey’s testimony:

Q: Did you resist at that time?

A: A little bit, but not really because — (pause)

Q: Because what?

A: Because I was afraid of him.

Not rape, obviously.

Ms. Gailey made bad choices, but that’s what 13 year-olds do. I got a pang of real sorrow, however, when this girl, revealing her innocence, described the “sex act” Polanski performed on her (before the rape and sodomy) as “cuddliness”. I guess that’s what the word sounds like if you haven’t seen it written before, or don’t know Latin.

I know it’s been thirty-plus years, and if Whoopi or the others apologists want to make the case that for a statute of limitations, I’ll listen. But let’s be clear at least on what happened. It was rape rape.

Women lashed for wearing trousers

Several Sudanese women have been flogged as a punishment for dressing “indecently”, according to a local journalist who was arrested with them.

Lubna Ahmed al-Hussein, who says she is facing 40 lashes, said she and 12 other women wearing trousers were arrested in a restaurant in the capital, Khartoum.

She told the BBC several of the women had pleaded guilty to the charges and had 10 lashes immediately.

Khartoum, unlike South Sudan, is governed by Sharia law.

Several of those punished were from the mainly Christian and animist south, Ms Hussein said.

Non-Muslims are not supposed to be subject to Islamic law, even in Khartoum and other parts of the mainly Muslim north.

She said that a group of about 20 or 30 police officers entered the popular Khartoum restaurant and arrested all the women wearing trousers.

“I was wearing trousers and a blouse and the 10 girls who were lashed were wearing like me, there was no difference,” she told the BBC’s Arabic service.

Ms Hussein said some women pleaded guilty to “get it over with” but others, including herself, chose to speak to their lawyers and are awaiting their fates.

Under Sharia law in Khartoum, the normal punishment for “indecent” dressing is 40 lashes.

Ms Hussein is a well-known reporter who writes a weekly column called Men Talk for Sudanese papers. She also works for the United Nations Mission in Sudan.

They are so barbaric. And the Left is silent.

- Aggie

So how come the stimulus package was supposed to hit the ground running, with many shovel-ready projects that would put people to work—and the unemployment rate for men is still 10.5%?

The current recession is hitting workers in just about every industry, but men are taking a much bigger hit than women.

The 2.5 percentage-point gap between men’s unemployment rate of 10.5 percent in May and women’s 8 percent rate is the highest it’s ever been since records were kept in 1948.

“The gap between female and male unemployment has never been as large as it is now,” said Sophia Koropeckyj, an economist with Moody’s Economy.com.

It’s not hard to see why. Two male-dominated industries - construction and manufacturing - account for half of the 6 million jobs lost since the recession started in December 2007 and both industries started shedding jobs before that.

Construction? I thought the stimulus was all about construction.

According to Phyllis Schlafly, I thought wrong:

[T]he feminists then demonstrated the death grip they hold over Obama and the leaders of the Democratic Party. The feminists swung into action with noisy accusations that the stimulus discriminated against women because its jobs would go mostly to men.

The feminists had no sympathy with the fact that men were victims of most of the lost jobs because the majority of manufacturing and construction jobs are men’s jobs. The segments of our economy dominated by women — social services, education, health, childcare and welfare — have actually gained jobs during this recession.

Nevertheless, the feminists demanded that half the stimulus jobs be given to women. The feminists worked to achieve this result by directing the stimulus funds into the types of jobs where women predominate and by allocating at least a third of the spending in manufacturing and construction industries to training women for those men’s jobs.

…

After working over the administration representatives assigned to get their orders from the feminists, they moved on to lobby Congress to write their demands into the text of the stimulus bill. They succeeded with the compliance of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid after face-to-face meetings, and Obama signed the revised stimulus bill.

A member of Pelosi’s staff dared to offer the suggestion that “apron ready” could be the female equivalent of the term “shovel ready.” The feminists didn’t think that was funny.

Feminists humorless? No way!

Unemployment figures show that men are continuing to lose jobs and that women are getting jobs created by the stimulus bill. The Associated Press reported in June that “social programs get bulk of stimulus cash; state ’shovel-ready’ jobs take back seat to spending on health care, welfare.”

Obama gave two of his economists the task of calculating the gender ratio of jobs to be created by the stimulus legislation. They reported that women had only 20 percent of jobs lost in the recession but would get 42 percent of stimulus-created jobs.

…

[T]he feminists can look forward to Sonia Sotomayor joining the high court and ruling that “empathy” requires reverse discrimination for women. After all, when she was on the Second Circuit, she upheld affirmative action in the Ricci case, and her own words (repeated many times) reveal that she believes a woman’s view of the law can be better than a man’s.

I think it’s time for President Obama to appear in front of a “Mission Accomplished” banner of his own.

Welcome to the new Europe

FRANKFURT, March 22 — A German judge has stirred a storm of protest here by citing the Koran in turning down a German Muslim woman’s request for a fast-track divorce on the ground that her husband beat her.

In a remarkable ruling that underlines the tension between Muslim customs and European laws, the judge, Christa Datz-Winter, said that the couple came from a Moroccan cultural milieu, in which she said it was common for husbands to beat their wives. The Koran, she wrote, sanctions such physical abuse.

Could I have made that up? No. Because the Koran sanctions wife beating, the German courts now sanction wife beating. Germany is a screwed-up place, no question about it. But I wonder when this will come here? How did lefties turn into this????

- Aggie

This is milder than the usual legal rulings coming from Saudi Arabia

Husbands are allowed to slap their wives if they spend lavishly, a Saudi judge said recently during a seminar on domestic violence, Saudi media reported Sunday.

Arab News, a Saudi English-language daily newspaper based in Riyadh, reported that Judge Hamad Al-Razine said that “if a person gives SR 1,200 [$320] to his wife and she spends 900 riyals [$240] to purchase an abaya [the black cover that women in Saudi Arabia must wear] from a brand shop and if her husband slaps her on the face as a reaction to her action, she deserves that punishment.”

Women in the audience immediately and loudly protested Al-Razine’s statement, and were shocked to learn the remarks came from a judge, the newspaper reported.

Arab News reported that Al-Razine made his remark as he was attempting to explain why incidents of domestic violence had increased in Saudi Arabia. He said that women and men shared responsibility, but added that “nobody puts even a fraction of blame” on women, the newspaper said.

Multiculturalism would demand that we sensitively explore all sides of this issue.

- Aggie

This is almost too frightening to post

Delara Darabi was just 17 when she was accused of killing her father’s cousin. She has now been hanged in a rushed execution

A 23-year-old woman made a frantic phonecall to her mother begging for help before Iran authorities held a rushed execution - disregarding a stay-of-execution and allegedly without informing her lawyer.

‘Mother they are going to execute me, please save me,’ Delara Darabi
screamed, before a prison official grabbed the phone and told her mother: ‘We are going to execute your daughter and there’s nothing you can do about it.’

She was just 17 when she confessed to the killing of her father’s cousin, before retracting her confession, saying she had been defending her 19-year-old boyfriend.
Delara Darabi was just 17 when she was accused of killing her father’s cousin. She has now been hanged in a rushed execution

Delara Darabi was just 17 when she was accused of killing her father’s cousin. She has now been hanged in a rushed execution

Miss Darabi has become a figurehead for human rights, and her case gained widespread attention after moving paintings and drawings that she made in her prison cell were shown around the world.

She told a judge that she had initially confessed because her boyfriend, who she said carried out the killing, told her that, as a minor, she would not be executed and she could save him from being put to death.

Lawyer Mohammad Mostafaei said Darabi called her parents just moments before the execution on Friday. He quoted her as saying, ‘Oh, Mother, I see the hangman’s noose in front of me. They are going to execute me. Please save me.’

Iran executed eight ‘juvenile offenders’ last year, and 42 since 1990, according to Amnesty International.

This is just sickening:

Mostafaei said the court did not seriously consider his arguments in the woman’s defence.

For example, he said, Darabi was left-handed, while all the evidence suggests the crime was committed by someone who was right-handed.

The execution of the young woman is another damaging blow to President Barack Obama’s attempts to thaw US relations with the Islamic regime.

‘Amnesty International is outraged at the execution and particularly at the news that her lawyer was not informed,’ said Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui, deputy chief for the Middle East and North Africa.

‘This appears to have been a cynical move on the part of the authorities to avoid domestic and international protests which might have saved Delara Darabi’s life.

‘This indicates that even decisions by the Head of the Judiciary carry no weight and are disregarded in the provinces.

‘Amnesty International does not consider her trial to have been fair, as the courts later refused to consider new evidence which the lawyer said would have proved she could not have committed the murder.’

Go and talk to your leftist friends. Ask them why they believe that this regime only plans to use nuclear power for peaceful purposes. Ask them why the Quakers, the Friends, held a dinner for Achmadinejiad when he spoke in NYC. Ask him why they make excuses for a group that stones girls for adultery, hangs homosexuals, and now this. How can they live with themselves?

- Aggie

See the Happy Couple. The husband established a new television station to counter anti-Muslim bias. Now he is under arrest because he beheaded his wife.

I wonder what she would tell us from the grave about womens’ rights under traditional Islamic law, sha’aria?

If you go to the link, you can read about more examples of respect for women in various communities.

- Aggie