Posts Tagged ‘war on women’

Obama’s ‘Major Policy’ Speech Last Thursday Documents He Is A Failure. His Abrogation Of The Rule Of Law On Friday Documents He Is A Fascist.

June 18, 2012

I thought this blog article which cites USA Today hit part of Obama’s trouble right in the testicles:

“Major economic speech” by Obama planned for Thursday
Posted by: ST on June 13, 2012 at 9:20 am

Via The USA Today:

President Obama will seek to draw economic contrasts with Republican opponent Mitt Romney in what campaign aides are billing as a major speech on Thursday.

In announcing the address at a community college in Cleveland, the Obama campaign said the president will describe his vision as “ensuring that our economy is built to last and restoring economic security for the middle class.”

Obama also plans to condemn Romney’s vision, which the campaign said is “based on the same failed economic policies that brought on the worst crisis since the Great Depression.

“Romney Economics is familiar and troubling,” said the Obama campaign. “More budget-busting tax cuts for the wealthy; fewer rules for Wall Street — the same formula that benefited a few, but that crashed our economy and devastated the middle class.”

Obama is not expected to unveil any new policy proposals of his own; the president is still trying to persuade Congress to adopt elements of a jobs bill he proposed last year.

(Bolded emphasis added by me)

Translation: there’s nothing new here. It’ll just more of the same old song and dance we’ve been hearing for the last three and a half years, jacked up on spinsanity with a generous helping of predictable Democrat class warfare and demagoguery – given in front of (presumably) a captive audience of college students (shocking).

In other news, dog bites man.

BTW, here’s Obama’s fundraising schedule for this week, in the event you actually thought his “presidential responsibilities” excuse for not campaigning for Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett in the Wisconsin recall election was legitimate. Just sayin’ …

Obama’s major speech is a giant bag of wind from the most prolific windbag who ever lived.  Check.

Obama is completely out of ideas.  Check check.

Ninety percent of Obama’s speech was just a slightly different way for Obama to demonize Mitt Romney.  And in what had been built up as a major policy speech at that.  Only ten percent of this speech Obama gave in Ohio on Thursday, April 14 AT BEST discussed what Obama would do if re-elected – which frankly amounted to a steadfast refusal to own up to ANY kind of responsibility for his last four years and a doubling down on what has already been demonstrated to have failed.  The bottom line is that we are currently cursed with a president who doesn’t want to talk about the past but doesn’t have any ideas about the future.

It’s not just me claiming Obama’s “major speech” was a major failure.

Consider leftist Jonathon Alter from MSNBC who said it was “one of the worst speeches I’ve ever heard Barack Obama make.”  And that was actually KIND, given the fact that “Before the speech was over, MSNBC’s Mike O’Brien begged the president to stop.”  While conservatives, of course, are saying, “Don’t you let them interrupt you, Barry Hussein.  By all means, please continue.  You were saying the private sector’s doing fine, right?”

That’s from MSNBC, which without any question is THE most überbiased überObama propaganda out there (see here and here for a couple quick examples).

The reliably leftist Washington Post’s leftist writer Dana Milbank – and this woman is a raving leftie – said that “instead of going to Ohio on Thursday with a compelling plan. for the future, the president gave Americans a falsehood wrapped in a fallacy.”  This in an article titled, “Skip the falsehoods, Mr. President, and give us a plan.”

I mean, thanks for confirming what I’ve been saying all along that Obama is a complete liar without a clue or a plan, but I can’t help but admit my surprise, Dana.  I mean, coming from a woman who once argued that if Obama comes across as stupid, it’s only because he’s just so incredibly brilliant that we frankly don’t deserve his greatness.  Which of course followed the liberal script.

It’s not adequate to say that Barack Obama is a failure; because Barack Obama is an epic failure.

Essentially, Obama’s campaign is about trying to recreate his now thoroughly disillusioned 2008 base.  And the only way that he can do that – because he is a completely failed leader who cannot legislate or compromise – is to issue a “jump the shark” series of executive orders that frankly abrogate the Constitution and the rule of law in America and set a terrifying precedent.  So he demonized his rhetoric of a bogus “war on women” (see here and here and here and here for how that’s working out for him) and then jumped that shark to “come out” in favor of gay marriage in blatant contradiction of his previous posture (see here and here for how that’s working out for him) – and then he just jumped that shark on Friday to abrogate the Constitution in order to recklessly pander to Hispanics.

And what Obama did on Friday was directly related to the colossal turd he laid on Thursday.  Obama HAS to keep jumping the shark because this complete failure SOMEHOW has to keep the support of a base that would otherwise abandon him like a liberal mommy having her baby aborted.

Consider what Obama himself said in the exact context of what he proceeded to do on Friday:

“The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you, not just on immigration reform. But that’s not how our system works. That’s not how our democracy functions. That’s not how our Constitution is written.”

And:

“I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books. That doesn’t mean I don’t know very well the real pain and heartbreak that deportations cause. I share your concerns and I understand them,” he said Monday. “We work every day to make sure we are enforcing flawed laws in the most humane possible way.”

And:

America is a nation of laws, which means I, as the president, am obligated to enforce the law. I don’t have a choice about that. That’s part of my job,” Obama said in March 2011 at a town hall event hosted by the Spanish-language television network Univision. […]

Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws,” he said. […]

There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as president.”

Apparently, Obama has limited powers unless he a) gives a crappy speech and b) is losing an election.  Then there is no law, no Constitution, and no democracy.

Which all goes to say that what Obama did was a) un-American (“not the way our system works“); b) anti-democratic (“That’s not the way our democracy functions“); and c) unconstitutional (“That’s not how our Constitution is written“).

When I say Obama is a fascist – and I’ve said it before at length – I mean it as a highly accurate descriptive term rather than merely as a rhetorical ad hominem.  And Barack Obama is a fascist BY OBAMA’S OWN PREVIOUS ADMISSIONS ABOUT WHAT HIS ACT ON FRIDAY CONSTITUTED when he set aside the separation of powers and imposed by “Führer-fiat” what the Congress had explicitly refused.

Liberal progressive legal expert Jonathan Turley (along with a number of other constitutional experts) had this to say about Obama’s action in setting aside the rule of law for his political expedience:

“The president is using executive power to do things Congress has refused to do, and that does fit a disturbing pattern of expansion of executive power under President Obama. In many ways, President Obama has fulfilled the dream of an imperial presidency that Richard Nixon strived for. On everything from (the Defense of Marriage Act) to the gaming laws, this is a president who is now functioning as a super legislator. He is effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”

Obama’s strategy is to set aside and flatly ignore the law for his own political benefit.  Every American who is not deeply troubled by that – troubled enough to not vote for this fascist – is UN-American.

What Obama has done is provide an example of out-and-out lawlessness on the part of the president of the United States.  And when we get a hard-core right wing president the way Obama has been a hard-core left wing president, Obama and the Democrat Party and all of those who voted for Obama and the Democrat Party will be entirely to blame for that president and his extremist actions.  You mark my words.  Because what goes around comes around, and if a Democrat can set aside the law the way Obama has now repeatedly done, well, guess who’s going to be stomping on your necks under your own president’s prior justification???  Conservatives are rising up in a spirit of righteous outrage.  You have repeatedly slapped us in the face through your messiah Obama, and the time is coming when we’re going to punch you hard in the nose and then keep on punching.  And when that day comes, liberals, look to yourselves for blame.

We are watching the unravelling of America as Obama that if his presidency doesn’t succeed, America won’t succeed.

America is losing steam on all economic fronts as we speak.  Europe is falling apart at the seams.  The Middle East is going to hell.  Scandal after scandal is erupting that directly involved the White House.  And Barack Obama is doing more fundraisers than the last five presidents COMBINED.

America doesn’t matter to this Turd-in-Chief.  He’s willing to sell out American foreign policy to the Russians as long as they’ll help him win in November.  And given that we already can see right in front of our faces that Obama is a fascist dictator in his first term, there’s no telling what will happen if he gets a second term and is answerable to nobody and to nothing.

There is absolutely no question that the constant stream of top secret leaks are coming directly out of the White House and that vital secrets are being revealed as a means to create propaganda depicting Obama as a “tough” leader.  General Jack Keane said that the only times that America had ever suffered this much damage to its security was when traitors were selling secrets to our adversaries.  We are literally talking about treason.  

It is VERY possible and even probable that Obama as president declassified vital secrets such as the existence of SEAL Team 6, such as the details of the bin Laden raid and precisely what America found in the compound, such as the top secret operation known as Olympic Games and the computer virus known as Stuxnet, such as the drone missions, such as his use of a “kill list.”  Why would he do something that depraved?  Why, in order to sell long-term American security in exchange for short-term votes, that’s why.  Even Diane Feinstein has publicly stated that no nation will trust America for years to come as a result of these leaks, and it is a fact that intelligence operatives who have cooperated with America have been captured and killed or imprisoned, with far more of that to come.  If Obama declassified these and other secrets that have been leaked in an avalanche unlike anything the American intelligence community has ever seen, Obama will have legalized treason.  As commander-in-chief, a president has the right to declassify secrets.  But no president in American history until Obama will have so despised America that he would see this nation burn if he doesn’t win his election.

Even the very left-leaning Daily Beast is outraged at our Traitor-in-Chief:

Last week, the Times ran two sensational front-page articles, one detailing the president’s personally administered list of terror suspects targeted for assassination—the so-called “kill list,”—the other a book excerpt about the origins of the cyberwarfare program, codenamed Olympic Games, out of which came the Stuxnet virus. Both pieces were widely seen as boosting the president’s credibility on national security just as the 2012 presidential race kicked into high gear. Both pieces cite anonymous current and former high-level officials in the administration. The White House has denied that the leaks were authorized, calling the suggestion “grossly irresponsible.” […]

This is the nugget of the problem. If information is too dangerous to be public, it’s supposed to be classified. If it isn’t, then it isn’t—full stop. Information isn’t classified—at least it isn’t supposed to be—for political gain or to cover up wrongdoing, or so high-level government officials can unilaterally dole out secrets to their favorite reporters at elite media organizations, or so well-connected politicians can manage the news cycle, undermine enemies, or win allies.

Officially, there is no middle ground. Sadly, leaks out of the Obama administration are beginning to look like official policy. Days before the Stuxnet and kill-list stories in the Times, columnist Glen Greenwald highlighted administration leaks to Hollywood filmmakers for an upcoming production about the raid that killed Osama bin Laden. This, amid the harshest crackdown on unauthorized leaks by any president ever—the Obama administration’s docket of six leak prosecutions under the Espionage Act dwarfs any previous administration’s persecution of loose-lipped officials.

One thing is obvious: Obama only goes after leakers who don’t politically benefit him.

Obama has a long history of personally demonizing people while doing the exact same thing that he demonized them for.  Think of Gitmo, when Obama demonized George Bush – only to keep Gitmo open himself in direct repudiation of his entire presidency by his very own rhetoric.  The same goes for the Patriot Act, for rendition, for military commissions, for domestic eavesdropping and for a long list of other issues.  The liberal New York Times literally accused Bush of “shredding the Constitution.”  Who is shredding it now by the very rhetoric of the left???  In the same way, it is none other than Barack Obama who has violated civil liberties in a manner that goes so far beyond anything that Bush ever did it is almost funny.  The very few liberals who are not abject moral hypocrites (eg., here and here) have pointed this fact out, but the vast majority of liberals who rabidly demonized Bush with froth drooling out of their mouths are nowhere to be seen now that the fascist in the Oval Office is the man they put in there.

Think of Obama’s demonization of Republicans being in the pockets of lobbyists and his lying promises that he would put an end to it.  In fact it’s worse under Obama than it has EVER been, and that according to the liberal Washington Post.  Obama demonized George Bush over the national debt and lied to the American people that he would cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term.  Instead the disgrace has given us more debt than all the previous presidents in history COMBINEDObama demonized Bush as irresponsible and even unpatriotic for his debt; now Obama’s debt dwarfs Bush’s.  Obama demonized George Bush as a failed leader for needing to raise the debt ceiling and voting against that debt ceiling himself; now Obama has THREE TIMES raised the debt ceiling to levels never seen in the history of the human race and demonizing Republicans who didn’t want to vote for it.

All again pointing out the fact that Obama leaking secrets that politically benefit him while at the same time attacking anybody who leaks secrets that doesn’t politically benefit him is par for the course.  Which reminds me of the fact that this man who is supposed to be working so hard to get America back on track recently completely his 100th round of golf – equivalent to taking four months off his job.

Barack Obama is a cynical liar and hypocrite without shame, without honor and without decency.  And that is simply a fact of history.  And so are his followers who will vote for him no matter what he does no matter how offended they were when the other side did a small fraction of what Obama has done.

That’s actually a big part of the reason Obama is pushing all of these leaks as a means of “boosting the president’s credibility on national security.”  He KNOWS that liberals are abject moral hypocrites who will vote for him even if he is murdering American citizens without any kind of trial with predator drones and even if he is personally selecting which terrorists live and which ones die with his political adviser David Axelrod sitting with him.  Obama knows that the left will vote for him no matter what he does because he knows that they are as much fascist hypocrites as he is.  It’s the independents he wants – and these people WANT the president to be like Bush and be tough on terrorist murderers.

And if Obama has to betray America to sell himself to these independents, what is that to him???  Obama is a man who never saw himself as an American to begin with.

Barack Obama is THE most evil man who has ever contaminated the White House.  I saw that in what might even be called a vision the moment I first saw those Jeremiah Wright tapes and realized that Obama had sat for twenty-plus years under the “spiritual leader” and “mentor” Jeremiah Wright and remained for sermon after sermon of this anti-American and racist Marxist.  In my very first political article ever, I betrayed both my naivety and understanding all at once.  I predicted that Democrats would rightly reject Barack Obama in favor of Hillary Clinton due to the Jeremiah Wright revelations; I was wrong because I simply failed to understand how truly depraved Democrats and the Democrat Party had become.  But I also rightly perceived the evil of Obama.  My last words in that very first article of mine were:

If Senator Barack Obama’s presidential aspirations aren’t done for now, they should be. If he wins the nomination, I have every confidence that he will be destroyed in the general election when the Wright issue comes back with a vengeance. Until this week, I believed Senator Hillary Clinton was a far more beatable candidate than Senator Barack Obama. I was wrong.

Barack Obama is far more wrong for sitting under the teaching of such a hateful man for so many years. In doing so, the most liberal Senator in the nation underscores just how extreme his views actually are, and just how dangerous a Barack Obama presidency would be for this country.

Republicans would have had to nominate David Duke for president to even BEGIN to come close to what Democrats did in nominating Barack Obama.  And this nation was asking for it and has dearly paid for it ever since that evil day on June 3, 2008 when he received enough delegates to win the Democrat nomination prior to the economic crash. 

This is God damned America until Obama is thrown out of office.  Now that we’ve seen this failure in action for four years, America has no excuse.  The soul of this nation is at stake in November, and America needs God far, far more than God needs America.

Remember How Democrats Cheered What They Called ‘The Arab Spring’ And Cheered Obama For Creating It? Well, Obama’s ‘Arab Spring’ = ‘Mass Rapes’ Now

June 12, 2012

The Democrat Party has exported its war on women (and see here and here) to Egypt:

In ‘new Egypt’, mobs sexually assault women with impunity
Reports of assaults on women in Tahrir Square, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year, have been on the rise
By SARAH EL DEEB
updated 6/7/2012 4:28:02 AM ET

CAIRO — Her screams were not drowned out by the clamor of the crazed mob of nearly 200 men around her. An endless number of hands reached toward the woman in the red shirt in an assault scene that lasted less than 15 minutes but felt more like an hour.

She was pushed by the sea of men for about a block into a side street from Tahrir Square. Many of the men were trying to break up the frenzy, but it was impossible to tell who was helping and who was assaulting. Pushed against the wall, the unknown woman’s head finally disappeared. Her screams grew fainter, then stopped. Her slender tall frame had clearly given way. She apparently had passed out.

The helping hands finally splashed the attackers with bottles of water to chase them away.

The assault late Tuesday was witnessed by an Associated Press reporter who was almost overwhelmed by the crowd herself and had to be pulled to safety by men who ferried her out of the melee in an open Jeep.

Reports of assaults on women in Tahrir, the epicenter of the uprising that forced Hosni Mubarak to step down last year, have been on the rise with a new round of mass protests to denounce a mixed verdict against the ousted leader and his sons in a trial last week.

The late Tuesday assault was the last straw for many. Protesters and activists met Wednesday to organize a campaign to prevent sexual harassment in the square. They recognize it is part of a bigger social problem that has largely gone unpunished in Egypt. But the phenomenon is trampling on their dream of creating in Tahrir a micro-model of a state that respects civil liberties and civic responsibility, which they had hoped would emerge after Mubarak’s ouster.

‘It shouldn’t be happening’
“Enough is enough,” said Abdel-Fatah Mahmoud, a 22-year-old engineering student, who met Wednesday with friends to organize patrols of the square in an effort to deter attacks against women. “It has gone overboard. No matter what is behind this, it is unacceptable. It shouldn’t be happening on our streets let alone Tahrir.”

No official numbers exist for attacks on women in the square because police do not go near the area, and women rarely report such incidents. But activists and protesters have reported a number of particularly violent assaults on women in the past week. Many suspect such assaults are organized by opponents of the protests to weaken the spirit of the protesters and drive people away.

Mahmoud said two of his female friends were cornered Monday and pushed into a small passageway by a group of men in the same area where the woman in the red shirt was assaulted. One was groped while the other was seriously assaulted, Mahmoud said, refusing to divulge specifics other than to insist she wasn’t raped.

Mona Seif, a well-known activist who has been trying to promote awareness about the problem, said Wednesday she was told about three different incidents in the past five days, including two that were violent. In one incident, the attackers ripped the woman’s clothes off and trampled on her companions, she said.

Let’s not forget that Barack Obama took complete credit for the Arab Spring and the Mubarak exit by rushing out to put himself right in the middle of it.  The left cheered Obama for his messianic leadership:

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: You know, gentlemen, I’m a little bit jubilant right now, a little bit frisky so I’ll say something that will bother people. But if you have, a lot of the people in this country think the President of the United States is Muslim, which he’s not, he’s Christian. They think he’s foreign born, which he’s not, he’s American born. But they have this attitude about him, the people on the right a lot of them, right? And here he is, and he comes into office, and this jubilant situation in Eqypt, with the first time in our lives we get to see people from the Arab world in a very positive democratic setting. Not as terrorists or not as people fighting Israel, or whatever. Not mouthing epithets against the West, but people like us.

DAVID CORN, MOTHER JONES: Right, celebrating.

MATTHEWS: In a way it’s like it took Obama to have this happen, or it’s just so serendipitous.

“It took Obama to have this happen.”  Praise him!  Worship him!  Our blessed messiah!  Of course, a lot of people – like Israelis – were arguing from the outset that “this” actually wasn’t a good thing.  At all.  Conservatives like Sean Hannity predicted from the very outset that the Muslim Brotherhood and radical Islamists were going to take control of Egypt – just as they did.

But who cares about reality?  Praise Obama!  Praise him!  Worship him!

 Is “serendipitous” a good adjective to describe rape?  I’m sorry, I don’t have my liberal-to-English dictionary with me.

Obama also erroneously massively downplayed the role that the Muslim Brotherhood would come to have (you know, unlike Sean Hannity and a lot of other conservatives who were RIGHT):

Mr. Obama downplayed concerns that the Muslim Brotherhood could take power and install a government hostile to U.S. interests.

“I think that the Muslim Brotherhood is one faction in Egypt. They don’t have majority support in Egypt but they are well organized and there are strains of their ideology that are anti U.S., there is no doubt about it,” Mr. Obama said.

Mr. Obama said he wanted a representative government in Egypt that reflected the country’s broader civil society.

The fool was wrong, wrong, WRONG about that:

Though the current upheavals in the Middle East were not initiated by the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist parties in Egypt, as in Tunisia and Libya, have been the chief beneficiaries of the collapse of long-standing authoritarian repressive regimes across North Africa.

In Egypt itself, the two largest Islamist groups, the Brotherhood and the Salafists, won about three-quarters of the ballots in the second round of legislative elections held in December 2011, while the secular and the liberal forces took a battering.

The Brotherhood, an organization founded by Egyptian schoolteacher Hassan el Banna back in 1928, has never deviated from its founder’s central axiom:

“Allah is our objective; the Prophet is our leader; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our way; dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

It is this radical vision, which animates all those in the region who seek a fully Islamic society and way of life.

The Muslim Brotherhood has always been deeply anti-Western, viscerally hostile to Israel and openly anti-Semitic — points usually downplayed in Western commentary on the “Arab Spring.”

In spite of the fact that Obama was actually giving aid to the Muslim Brotherhood, Obama demanded that America give a billion dollars in aid to EgyptYou know, to the country that is now using RAPE in its war on women.

And now the same fool is making the same mistakes in Syria.

First of all, do you remember the justifications for going to war over Libya, which also aint working out that great?  We were told that “Barack Obama’s war in Libya bears the intellectual imprint of Samantha Power.”  And what was that “intellectual imprint”?  This:

“She began to see war as an instrument to achieving her liberal, even radical, values.”

That’s just GREAT.  So Obama went to war with Libya to remove a dictator who threatened to kill his own people but has refused to go to war with a dictator who has ACTUALLY murdered over fourteen thousand of his own people.  But apparently radical liberal Obama is on the same page as doctrinaire liberal Barbara Walters – because they’re both helping this vicious dictator.

Libya has not worked out very well.  At all.  Aside from the fact that Libya has descended into complete anarchy, there is the fact that terrorists have used that anarchy to turn Libya into another Afghanistan/Yemen-style haven.

Oh, and Obama also supported and trained Egyptian activists to undermine and overthrow Mubarak.  Just to complete the picture of who supported all these rapes that are now going on.

Both Democrats and radical Muslims have the same cherished goal: to keep women ignorant and in line with their agenda no matter how obviously anti-woman it is.

Former CNN Anchor BLASTS Obama For ‘War On Women’ And ‘Julia’ Campaigns And Says STOP CONDESCENDING TO WOMEN

May 22, 2012

Way to say it, Campbell – and for that matter (and believe me I never thought I’d say this) my hat is off to the New York Times for publishing this:

Obama: Stop Condescending to Women
By CAMPBELL BROWN
Published: May 19, 2012

WHEN I listen to President Obama speak to and about women, he sometimes sounds too paternalistic for my taste. In numerous appearances over the years — most recently at the Barnard graduation — he has made reference to how women are smarter than men. It’s all so tired, the kind of fake praise showered upon those one views as easy to impress. As I listen, I am always bracing for the old go-to cliché: “Behind every great man is a great woman.”

Some women are smarter than men and some aren’t. But to suggest to women that they deserve dominance instead of equality is at best a cheap applause line.

My bigger concern is that in courting women, Mr. Obama’s campaign so far has seemed maddeningly off point. His message to the Barnard graduates was that they should fight for a “seat at the table” — the head seat, he made sure to add. He conceded that it’s a tough economy, but he told the grads, “I am convinced you are tougher” and “things will get better — they always do.”

Hardly reassuring words when you look at the reality. According to the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University, about 53.6 percent of men and women under the age of 25 who hold bachelor’s degrees were jobless or underemployed last year, the most in at least 11 years. According to the Pew Research Center, if we broaden the age group to 18- to 29-year-olds, an estimated 37 percent are unemployed or out of the work force, the highest share in more than three decades.

The human faces shouldn’t get lost amid the statistics. I spent last weekend with a friend who attended excellent private schools and graduated from Tufts University two years ago. She’s intelligent, impressive and still looking for a full-time job.

The women I know who are struggling in this economy couldn’t be further from the fictional character of Julia, presented in Mr. Obama’s Web ad, “The Life of Julia,” a silly and embarrassing caricature based on the assumption that women look to government at every meaningful phase of their lives for help.

My cousin in Louisiana started a small company with a little savings, renovating houses. A single mom, she saved enough to buy a home and provide child care for her son. When the economy went belly up, so did her company. She was forced to sell her home and move in with her parents. She has found another job, but doesn’t make enough to move out. Family, not government, has been everything to her at this time of crisis. She, and they, wouldn’t have it any other way.

Another member of my family left her job at an adoption agency just before the economy crashed. Also a single mother, she has been looking for a way back to a full-time job ever since. She has been selling things on eBay to make ends meet. Friends and family, not government, have been there at the dire moments when she has asked them to be. Again, she, and they, wouldn’t have it any other way.

This is not to say that government doesn’t play a role in their lives. It does and it should. But it isn’t a dominant one, and certainly not an overwhelming factor in their daily existence.

It’s obvious why the president is doing a full-court press for the vote of college-educated women in particular. The Republican primaries probably did turn some women away. Rick Santorum did his party no favors when he spoke about women in combat (“I think that can be a very compromising situation, where people naturally may do things that may not be in the interest of the mission, because of other types of emotions that are involved”); when he described the birth of a child from rape as “a gift in a very broken way”; and how, if he was president, he would make the case for the damage caused by contraception.

But Mitt Romney will never be confused with Rick Santorum on these issues, and many women understand that. (I should disclose here that my husband is an adviser to Mr. Romney; I have no involvement with any campaign, and have been an independent journalist throughout my career.) The struggling women in my life all laughed when I asked them if contraception or abortion rights would be a major factor in their decision about this election. For them, and for most other women, the economy overwhelms everything else.

Another recent Pew Research Center survey found that voters, when thinking about whom to vote for in the fall, are most concerned about the economy (86 percent) and jobs (84 percent). Near the bottom of the list were some of the hot-button social issues.

Tiffany Dufu, who heads the White House Project, a nonpartisan group aimed at training young women for careers in politics and business, got a similar response when she informally polled young women in her organization. “The issues that have been defined as all women care about are way off — young women feel it has put them further in a box they don’t necessarily want to be in,” she told me. “Independence is what is so important to these women.”

I have always admired President Obama and I agree with him on some issues, like abortion rights. But the promise of his campaign four years ago has given way to something else — a failure to connect with tens of millions of Americans, many of them women, who feel economic opportunity is gone and are losing hope. In an effort to win them back, Mr. Obama is trying too hard. He’s employing a tone that can come across as grating and even condescending. He really ought to drop it. Most women don’t want to be patted on the head or treated as wards of the state. They simply want to be given a chance to succeed based on their talent and skills. To borrow a phrase from our president’s favorite president, Abraham Lincoln, they want “an open field and a fair chance.”

In the second decade of the 21st century, that isn’t asking too much.

Campbell Brown is a former news anchor for CNN and NBC.

Campbell Brown joins a few incredibly courageous liberal women such as Kirsten Powers who were rightly saw the abject hypocritical double-standard (and see also here) that was just getting replayed over and over again.  And we may finally be reaching that watershed moment in which feminist women who actually give a damn about WOMEN rather than political ideology have come to realize that nothing meaningful will EVER be done to advance women when the side claiming the women’s mantle are abject hypocrites with constant double standards.

I applaud this courage from women who almost certainly vote Democrat because the only way to ANY true reform of ANYTHING is to take on your own side’s hypocrisy.  Take two former Republicans who now live in infamy: Joseph McCarthy and Richard Nixon.  Both went down in flames when their OWN REPUBLICAN PARTY turned on them and said, “You’ve gone too far.  We’re done with you.”

In the case of Richard Nixon in particular – six of the Judiciary Committees’ seventeen Republicans sided with the Democrats in voting for impeachment – if Republicans had rigidly stuck by Nixon for the sake of political party or ideology (which is exactly what happened when ZERO Democrats supported impeachment for Bill Clinton who had engaged in such gross behavior and dishonesty that he was disbarred as a lawyer for his absence of ethics) Republicans could have “won” by doing the same thing Democrats would later do.  Instead a half dozen Republicans finally said, “This is simply too much.  He’s gone too far.”

Here we are at a moment in history in which Obama has clearly gone too far.  And Obama has actually done it again and again on issue after issue.

As just one example that ties in with the “war on women” myth, as a result of Obama’s radical “health care” agenda Catholic universities are beginning to drop their health coverage for all students rather than forfeit their religious freedom to practice a theology that they have held for 1,500 years.  Is that helping women???

Ave Maria University, one of the Catholic universities that is dropping health coverage for ALL students as a result of Obama’s rabid policies, also pointed out that because of ObamaCare their policies were going to increase between 65 and as much as 82 percent.  How in the hell is that helping women???

At some point Democrats are simply going to have to say, “STOP!!!  You’ve gone too far!!!”  Because otherwise this nation is doomed.  And women and the children they love will be hurt more than anybody.

And this ties in to a greater threat that we see in the helpless government-dependent-for-life Julia that Obama has fabricated.  I would argue that Catholic universities getting out of providing assistance and the greater issue of all Christian churches and parachurch organizations being driven out of providing services for the poor is exactly what Obama wants in his “fundamental transformation” of America.  He wants them out because he dreams of an America in which government is the ONLY provider of help and the ONLY savior.  Will that help women???

A few courageous liberal feminists are recognizing that the Democrat Party under Barack Obama is a rhetoric machine that relies exclusively on demonization of the “other side” rather than doing anything whatsoever to build any kind of consensus for genuine reform of anything.  And the Democrat Party and liberal mantra from “feminists” has been to support abject liberal misogyny to advance political ideology for the sake of political ideology in some faint hope that the same hypocrites will change things for women.  And they won’t because it’s all built on lies and words rather than substance.

I’ve never met a Republican yet who didn’t have a mother.  I’ve never personally ever met a Republican husband who didn’t have a wife.  A whopping load of Republican families include daughters.  And basically have of all Republicans including half of the staunchest of Republicans are WOMEN.  This whole “war on women” argument is so blatantly dishonest and deceitful it is simply unreal.

I call on Democrat women to vote Obama out in November for their own sakes.  Because he’s gone too damn far.

Obama, The War-On-Women President, Slow-Jams On Jimmy Fallon Show To Same Band That Played ‘Lyin’ Ass Bitch’ When Michelle Bachmann Appeared As Guest

April 26, 2012

Yes, this is the Barack Obama who morally lectured Republicans for their “war on women” but kept Bill Maher’s money and support.

Remember this?

Michele Bachmann’s Late Night Intro Music: ‘Lyin’ Ass Bitch’

As the house band for dancing spider monkeyJimmy Fallon, The Roots are sometimes forced to express themselves via the intro music that they choose to play when various celebrities walk out onto Fallon’s stage.

Last night, Michele Bachmann came on the show. The intro song The Roots played for her: “Lyin Ass Bitch,” by Fishbone. Clip above.

Keep up the good work, fellas.

[via City Pages]

Yeah, Barack Obama was perfectly FINE with Jimmy Fallon’s war on women.  As long as they are women Obama and his liberal thugs hate.

Obama just appeared on Jimmy Fallon – the show that labeled the very accomplished Michelle Bachmann a “lyin’ ass bitch” and was serenaded by the same band that hated women.

According to the mass media propaganda mindset that Obama shares, it is perfectly wonderful to viscerally hate women; as long as those women aren’t liberals.

Throw that in onto the pile of which party truly hates and wars on women.

George Bush never wasted a moment of the American peoples’ times on these late night comedy shows.  Versus Barack Obama who has appeared on more of them than you could shake a dead cat at.  Because George Bush had more class in his pinky finger than Obama has ever had or will ever have.

Liberals CONTINUE To Document That They Despise Housewives And Mothers

April 17, 2012

Hillary Clinton stepped in it and left the stinky tracks on the American consciousness in the 1992:

“I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.

Teresa Heinz-Kerry stepped in it and proved that the Democrat war on housewives and stay-at-home moms was hardly a “Fluke” (pardon the pun):

Q: You’d be different from Laura Bush?

A: Well, you know, I don’t know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don’t know that she’s ever had a real job — I mean, since she’s been grown up.

Laura Bush was a public school teacher and a librarian as a “grown-up,” but that’s only a “real” job if you walk out on your classroom to strike for more union garbage, apparently.

And of course Hillary Rosen stomped in it and pretty much rubbed it all over the place:

“Guess what?” Rosen said. “His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing.”

“Guess what?”  Conservatives said.  “Hillary Rosen visited the Obama White House 35 times – literally six times more often than walking embarrassment Vice President Joe Biden and more than twice as much as Obama’s CIA director. ”

And guess what?  This Hillary Rosen step-in-it moment also follows the fact that the Obama White House is only paying women 4/5ths what it is paying men.

And guess what?  It follows a VERY disturbing liberal trend that’s going on worldwide revealing a pathological hostility to families and stay-at-home moms and anything that gets in the way of government indoctrination of children.  And it follows a downright CREEPY trend that Barack Obama and Democrats have established in wanting our kids.

And Bill Maher – the guy who gave Obama a million dollars AFTER saying the following things about women –

  • BILL MAHER: Bristol claims that the night she lost her virginity, she had accidentally gotten drunk on wine coolers that she didn’t know contained alcohol and then — and then blacked out and didn’t remember a thing. Oh, the Palins. I’ll tell you the s–t doesn’t fall far from the bat. Bristol, just admit it, you were horny, and while we’re at it, stop claiming that you were on birth control pills that didn’t work when you got pregnant. Here’s a tip, hon – they’re not birth control pills if they’re shaped like Fred Flintstone.
  • BILL MAHER: “Did you hear this – Sarah Palin finally heard what happened in Japan and she’s demanding that we invade ‘Tsunami,’” Maher said. “I mean she said, ‘These ‘Tsunamians’ will not get away with this.’ Oh speaking of dumb twats, did you…”
  • BILL MAHER: But I’ve often said that if I had — I have two dogs — if I had two retarded children, I’d be a hero. And yet the dogs, which are pretty much the same thing. What? They’re sweet. They’re loving. They’re kind, but they don’t mentally advance at all. … Dogs are like retarded children.” — Bill Maher
  • BILL MAHER: “And finally, new rule – and I never thought I’d be the one to say this – but DON’T show me your tits! (laughter) Last week the world’s first nurse-in was held to protest the case of a woman who was breastfeeding in public and asked by an Applebee’s manager not to leave but just to cover up a little bit. Because the wait staff got tired of hearing, ‘I’ll have what that kid’s having!’ (laughter) I’m not trying to be insensitive, here. I know your baby needs to eat, but so do I and this is Applebee’s, so I’m already nautious [sic]. (laughter) Breastfeeding a baby is an intimate act, and I don’t want to watch strangers performing intimate acts. At least not for free. (laughter) It cheapens it. But breastfeeding activists – yes, breastfeeding activists, called Lactivists (laughter) – say this is a human right and appropriate everywhere, because it’s natural. Well, so is masturbating, but I generally don’t do that at Applebee’s

I could actually just go on and on, but you get the point.  The guy who gave Obama a MILLION DOLLARS – or to put it another way the guy whose MILLION DOLLARS Obama is keeping – has a visceral hatred of women and he’s a big part of the Democrat Party fundraising operation.  Just to show which side is truly “anti-woman.”  And which side is abject hypocrites on a daily basis (see also here).

Well, all that aside, the man who is so honored by Barack Obama that Obama has steadfastly refused to return Maher’s gift now has this to say about the Hillary Rosen-Ann Romney controversy:

“The language here was, perhaps, inartful, or perhaps America is a society that lives to fight stupid, non-consequential, meaningless controversies and this is the new one,” Bill Maher said during the panel portion of his HBO show “Real Time” last night.

But what she meant to say, I think, was that Ann Romney has never gotten her ass out of the house to work. No one is denying that being a mother is a tough job, I remember that I was a handful. Okay, but there is a big difference in being a mother, and that tough job, and getting your ass out of the door at 7am when it’s cold, having to deal with the boss, being in a workplace, and even if you’re unhappy you can’t show it for 8 hours, that is a different kind of tough thing,” Maher observed last night.

Being a liberal means being stupid times arrogant times evil squared.

I liked the retort to Bill Maher and the Democrat Party and the Barack Obama who gladly accepts Bill Maher’s million dollars that I came across:

You know what else is different? Putting on a strong front and managing not to lose one’s cool when the kids are misbehaving and trying to kill each other. The same goes for crawling out of bed at 3:30 a.m. when your colicky baby needs to be held more than you need sleep. Or prying open a stubborn toddler’s mouth so he/she won’t starve to death due to his/her weird hunger strike. Let’s not forget figuring out a way to get the children off the playground when they refuse to leave. These are all challenges I’ve faced as an aunt, and I can’t even begin to imagine how much of a struggle it is to be a parent and encounter these things every day. The day-to-day annoyances and occasional meltdowns are trivial, but raising happy, healthy children is not an easy, comparable task.

And yet it makes sense that Maher, who isn’t a parent himself, wouldn’t understand that striving to be the best dad/mom possible is just as hard — perhaps even more difficult — than working with a prickly manager and going to the office in frigid temperatures.

The funniest thing of all is how you’ve got Democrats publicly whining about how the “war on women” they started has backfired on them and how unfair it is.

Democrats And Their War On Women

April 13, 2012

Democrats are trying to distance themselves from senior Democrat and Obama strategist Hillary Rosen’s attack on women and on motherhood.  It’s a tough sell: Hillary Rosen has visited the Obama White House 35 times, versus only 16 times for energy Secretary Steven Chu, only 9 times for CIA director David Petraeus, and interestingly only 6 times for Joe Biden.

Hillary Rosen is a top level Obama strategist.  As well as a woman-and-motherhood basher.

And this new revelation is in perfect harmony with the Obama White House that pays women only 4/5ths of what it pays men and its history of being a “boy’s club” and a “hostile workplace” for women.

Hilary Rosen, Democratic Strategist, Criticizes Ann Romney For Having ‘Never Worked A Day In Her Life’
The Huffington Post  |  By Mollie Reilly Posted: 04/11/2012 11:53 pm Updated: 04/12/2012 1:09 pm

Democratic strategist Hilary Rosen stirred controversy Wednesday evening when she criticized Ann Romney for having “never worked a day in her life.”

During a discussion on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 of the so-called war on women, Rosen said she agreed with Mitt Romney’s claim that women care more about economic issues than reproductive rights. But Romney’s use of his wife Ann’s perspective shows how poorly the former Massachusetts governor connects with voters, Rosen said.

“Guess what?” Rosen said. “His wife has actually never worked a day in her life. She’s never really dealt with the kinds of economic issues that a majority of the women in this country are facing.”

Rosen continued, “There’s something much more fundamental about Mitt Romney. He seems so old-fashioned when it comes to women, and I think that comes across, and I think that that’s going to hurt him over the long term. He just doesn’t really see us as equal.”

Rosen’s comments provoked a quick response from the Romney campaign, as well as from President Barack Obama’s reelection team.

Ann Romney, who previously was not on Twitter, sent her first official tweet in response to Rosen’s comments.

“I made a choice to stay home and raise five boys,” she wrote.  “Believe me, it was hard work.”

Top Romney adviser Eric Fehrnstrom also tweeted about the interview, referring to Rosen as an “Obama adviser,” even though Rosen is employed neither by the Obama campaign nor the Democratic National Committee.

Obama’s strategists rapidly disassociated themselves and the campaign from Rosen’s comments.

“I could not disagree with Hilary Rosen any more strongly,” Jim Messina, Obama’s campaign manager, wrote in a tweet. “Her comments were wrong and family should be off-limits. She should apologize.”

David Axelrod made a similar statement, tweeting that he was “disappointed” in Rosen’s “inappropriate and offensive” comments.

Rosen tweeted several times about her remarks, saying she has “nothing against” Romney’s wife and that her comments were intended to criticize Mitt Romney’s use of Ann as an “expert on women and the economy.”

In a blog on The Huffington Post, Rosen (who, in full disclosure, was once employed at this website), further clarified her comments. Ann Romney “seems like a nice lady who has raised nice boys and struggled with illness and handles their long-term effects with grace and dignity,” Rosen wrote. “What is more important to me and 57 percent of current women voters is her husband saying he supports women’s economic issues because they are the only issues that matter to us and then he fails on even those.”

This Democrat war on women is NOTHING NEW:

Teresa Heinz-Kerry did it to Laura Bush in 2004:

Q: You’d be different from Laura Bush?

A: Well, you know, I don’t know Laura Bush. But she seems to be calm, and she has a sparkle in her eye, which is good. But I don’t know that she’s ever had a real job — I mean, since she’s been grown up.

For the record, Laura Bush was a teacher and librarian – which most people would describe as “grown up” jobs.

And then there are those infamous words from Hillary Clinton as she revealed her open hostility for women who work HARD as homemakers:

“I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies and had teas, but what I decided to do was to fulfill my profession which I entered before my husband was in public life.”

Yep, that’s all my mother did, and I’m sure yours as well; she just stayed home and baked cookies and had teas.  That lazy good for nothing useless woman.  Good thing Hillary Clinton came along or no woman ever could have possibly ever managed to lift her carcass off the couch, I’m just certain.

My mother was a teacher.  After my older brother and before I was born, my mother chose to sacrifice her career.  She stopped working until my brother and I were in school, and then she worked so that she could be home when we left for school and home when we came home from school.  And then she did all the homemaking stuff – which is HARD, btw – on top of that.  She has also run all the finances.

Because of her sacrificial life and because of her example of Christian faith, my mother is my hero.  She’s beyond incredible.  Oh, and she’s a diehard Republican and dues-paying member of the National Federation of Republican Women.  What an example and trusted friend and wise counselor my mother has been throughout my life.

It’s interesting, what woman won the right to women’s suffrage (i.e. the vote)???  Susan B. AnthonyAnd what party did Susan B. Anthony belong to and campaign for?  The Republican Party – which happens to be the same party that won freedom for black people in abject slavery to DEMOCRATS.  Susan B. Anthony said, “I shall work for the Republican party and call on all women to join me, precisely… for what that party has done and promises to do for women, nothing more, nothing less.”

I wrote an article the day before yesterday on the war on mothers, families and children going on in Sweden – and how Democrats are trying to take that demonic agenda here.

A few excerpts from the source article I commented on tie right in to what we’ve steadily been hearing from Democrats’ own mouths:

“The Swedish government believes that [the] state takes better care of children than parents,” said Jonas Himmelstrand, president of ROHUS, the Swedish Homeschool Association. […]

“We were afraid to stay. Our children were in danger and our family was in danger,” Cina said. […]

Most Swedish home-schoolers don’t make the decision for religious reasons, but because they see the educational and social development home schooling provides.

“Sweden’s treatment of parents in the area of education is totalitarian, essentially. They want to take children from birth to graduation and control them,” said Michael Donnelly, director of international relations at the Homeschool Legal Defense Association. […]

Parents are pressured to put their children in daycare at age one.

“One mother told me when she went with her 18 month son to his medical checkup, and he was not in daycare. They said, ‘Oh, your son is not in daycare? But he has to go to daycare. He needs that and you need to work,’”Himmselstrand told CBN News.

“The argument they give about this is that every child has a ‘right’ to daycare. This is not a right that parents are allowed to interfere with.”

Donnelly said there is a bad historical precedent for Sweden’s control of children and education: the dictatorships of the last century.

“This seems to be what’s happening in Sweden,” he said. “They want to get the kids. They want to socialize them in the way they think is appropriate, and they don’t want the parents involved.” […]

‘No More Housewives’

A major issue for the Swedish government is gender equality.

The motto for a leading educator in the country states, “Sweden: No more housewives, but higher wages for women.”

Tamara Himmelstrand said she used to experience the daily disapproval of stay-at-home moms in Sweden.

“The incredible disdain Swedish society has for motherhood and the work that I was doing [made me feel like a bad person],” she said.

But Sweden’s experiment with state control of children and families does not seem to be going so well. The Swedish government’s own report shows the psychological health of Swedish youth is declining faster than in 11 comparable European countries.

“And this is being discussed [by experts],” Jonas Himmselstrand said. “Why are Swedish young people so psychologically unhealthy, so full of anxiety, so easily depressed?”

“If you ask any developmental psychologist in Sweden who is into this question, they would say, ‘You know, it has a likely connection to the fact that 93 percent of all 18 month to 5-year-olds are in daycare, often for many hours a day,” he continued.

Money quotes: “Oh, your son is not in daycare? But he has to go to daycare. He needs that and you need to work.”  That, of course, and this:

A major issue for the Swedish government is gender equality.

The motto for a leading educator in the country states, “Sweden: No more housewives, but higher wages for women.”

Tamara Himmelstrand said she used to experience the daily disapproval of stay-at-home moms in Sweden.

“The incredible disdain Swedish society has for motherhood and the work that I was doing [made me feel like a bad person],” she said.

And this war on women, on children, on motherhood and on families is all right out of the Democrat playbook.  Sweden is where Obama wants America to be.  Somehow his ilk always targets the children and always falsely claims the mantle of representing women.

Democrats – who most CERTAINLY don’t represent women like my mother – like to depict themselves as pro-“working women.”  But that isn’t true, either.  They are pro-LIBERAL woman and ANTI-woman in every other respoect.

When the Rush Limbaugh comment on Sarah Fluke came out, reliably liberal feminist Kirsten Powers said that Rush’s comments were NOTHING compared to what women-bashing liberal men get away with ALL THE TIME.  Which is to say that the only reason Democrats are able to maintain the facade of being the party of women has been because of outright media propaganda.

Kirsten Powers – whom I almost ALWAYS disagree with – is a consistent feminist who was appalled at the vicious treatment that conservative women such as Sarah Palin have received from the liberal establishment.

She had the following exchange with also-liberal Alan Colmes about the abject hypocrisy that is the National Organization of Women:

During the 5 September 2008 broadcast of the Fox News program “Hannity and Colmes,” Kirsten Powers said this:

“It’s not the National Organization for Women, right? But it’s not. It’s really the National Organization for Liberal Women. It’s not the National Organization for Women, because she’s [Sarah Palin is] a woman. And they put out a statement saying, “Not all women speak for women. Sarah Palin doesn’t speak for women.” Well, look; this woman, when I look at her – even if I don’t support her, you know, a lot of her policies, she is the embodiment of what feminism was all about. She’s a mother, she’s successful, her husband helps with the children. You know, we should be exited about this, even if you don’t support her.”

Alan Colmes then said:

“If you support someone just because they’re a woman, and the National Organization for Women supports anybody whose a woman,then you’re saying we’re just supporting them because they’re a woman, and you’re not being discerning at all. So you can’t have it both ways.”

And Kirsten Powers responded:

“I would agree with that if they had any kind of actual moral authority, but they don’t, because they don’t ever support any women who don’t support their very narrow agenda. So they should just rename themselves and say what they’re really for, and stop pretending like they really care about the advancement for women.”

And of course Kirsten Powers was entirely correct.  I’m surprised that liberals didn’t declare a jihad on her the way they have on so many other strong independent women whom the left viciously and hatefully and frankly demonically attacked for wanting to be strong and independent in their own way rather than in Hillary Clinton’s and now Hillary Rosen’s way.

At least now the mask has been ripped off to reveal the ugly face of the left once again.

This was an issue that the Democrat Party disingenuously fabricated and demagogued.  Hopefully this revelation will throw a very large bucket of very cold water on the Democrat Party’s dishonest rhetoric.

Furthermore, putting a spotlight on Ann Romney was a GIGANTIC mistake on the part of the Democrats because it only reveals that Republican women can kick some serious ass without even looking like they’re fighting.

Obama ‘Boy’s Club’ White House A Hostile Work Place Against Women (Obama Pays Women SIGNIFICANTLY Less Than Men)

April 12, 2012

Anita Dunn, Obama’s former White House communications director who got in trouble after she revealed that Chairman Mao was one of her heroes, said that Obama’s White House met all the requirements of a “hostile workplace”:

A new book claims the Obama White House is a “hostile workplace” for women and a “boys’ club.”

“Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington, and the Education of a President” by Pulitzer Prize winner Ron Suskind discusses pervasive infighting within the administration, and quotes former White House communications director Anita Dunn as saying, “this place would be in court for a hostile workplace.”

“It actually fit all of the classic legal requirements for a genuinely hostile workplace to women,” Dunn said.

You remember all the hell George Bush got when one of his communications people turned against him???  The media was ALL OVER THAT.

But of course a woman saying that Obama’s White House was a hostile workplace against women didn’t blame Bush.  So who cared in the mainstream media???  You know, even though it was TRUE.

Hostile Workplace
Obama White House pays women less than men, records show
BY: Andrew Stiles – April 11, 2012 2:52 pm

Female employees in the Obama White House make considerably less than their male colleagues, records show.

According to the 2011 annual report on White House staff, female employees earned a median annual salary of $60,000, which was about 18 percent less than the median salary for male employees ($71,000).

Calculating the median salary for each gender required some assumptions to be made based on the employee names. When unclear, every effort was taken to determine the appropriate gender.

The Obama campaign on Wednesday lashed out at presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney for his failure to immediately endorse the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act, a controversial law enacted in 2009 that made it easier to file discrimination lawsuits.

President Obama has frequently criticized the gender pay gap, such as the one that exists in White House.

“Paycheck discrimination hurts families who lose out on badly needed income,” he said in a July 2010 statement. “And with so many families depending on women’s wages, it hurts the American economy as a whole.”

It is not known whether any female employees at the White House have filed lawsuits under the Ledbetter Act.

The president and his Democratic allies have accused Republicans of waging a “war on women,” and have touted themselves as champions of female equality. Obama’s rhetoric, however, has not always been supported by his actions.

White House press secretary Jay Carney told reporters last week that Obama believes it is “long past the time” for women to be admitted to the traditionally all-male Augusta National Golf Club, site of the Masters golf tournament.

But the president has demonstrated a strong preference for all-male foursomes in his frequent golf outings, a bias that extends well beyond the putting green and into the Oval Office.

“Women are Obama’s base, and they don’t seem to have enough people who look like the base inside of their own inner circle,” former Clinton press secretary Dee Dee Myers told the New York Times.

In a 2011 article titled “The White House Boys’ Club: President Obama Has a Woman Problem,” TIME magazine’s Amy Sullivan detailed the president’s fondness for male-dominated environments.

“There’s a looseness to Obama when he’s hanging out with the boys club that doesn’t appear in co-ed gatherings,” she wrote. “The president blows off steam on the golf course with male colleagues and friends. He takes to the White House basketball court with NBA stars, men’s college players, and male cabinet members and members of Congress.”

As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama was criticized for paying the women on his campaign staff less than the men, and far less than GOP opponent John McCain paid his female staffers.

Obama is such a hypocrite it is utterly unreal.  But he doesn’t have to worry about being exposed; he’s got the most hypocritical media propaganda since Joseph Goebbels was running Hitler’s press to take care of him.