dagblog - Comments for "It's Settled then: Women We're at War"

Good point. It may well not

AmericanDreamer — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 14:16:34 +0000

Good point. It may well not be the Occupy phenomenon that in the end has the biggest impact on the GOP's near-term fortunes, but the attack on women.

Yes, Richard, yes to all.

Ramona — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 12:59:19 +0000

In reply to Rush is really suffering from

Yes, Richard, yes to all. And I'm right there with you on Peggy Noonan's response. Shows how scared they really are that they've leaned too far to the Right and now they're having a hard time straightening up.

Finally the attacks have

trkingmomoe — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:13:45 +0000

In reply to It's Settled then: Women We're at War

Finally the attacks have gotten so mean that even the most unpolitical women voter is paying attention. This war has been going on for a long time and is long past due that there is a push back. I don't think the angry genie can be put back into the bottle by the GOP. This quiet activism is growing much larger then the Tea Party that MSM hyped up. I guess ladies sitting at computers organizing boycotts and sending emails doesn't make good sound bites. But if they bring down the mighty mouth piece of right extremism, talk radio, it will hint what coming in November.

In an outdoor interview with

Aunt Sam — Wed, 14 Mar 2012 05:35:33 +0000

In reply to It's Settled then: Women We're at War

In an outdoor interview with Ann Rubin of KSDK.com, Romney offered a few suggestions on how he would cut the deficit.

"Of course you get rid of Obamacare, that's the easy one, but there are others," he said. "Planned Parenthood, we're going to get rid of that."

That took me a minute; which

Richard Day — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:39:55 +0000

In reply to It would appear that the

That took me a minute; which means that it is a very fine line indeed. I therefore render unto you the Dayly Line of the Day Award for this here Dagblog Site, given to all of you from all of me.

The invisible hand of capitalism is giving the finger to rusho.

I could not have said this half as well!

It would appear that the

Verified Atheist — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:08:21 +0000

In reply to Rush is really suffering from

It would appear that the "invisible hand" is giving Rush the middle finger.

I hesitate to delve into the

Aunt Sam — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 18:47:53 +0000

In reply to It's Settled then: Women We're at War

I hesitate to delve into the topic of this post because I am so enraged and sickened that it is even needed. And, sadly, it definitely is!

The initial debacle has again given birth (pun intended) to a being that was thought/hoped by most to have drawn it's last putrid gasp. It's tentacles seem to be ever multiplying, desperately grabbing onto whatever/whoever doesn't turn away in disgust and disdain.

And, while it gives me no joy, the fact that so many women heed the siren call and willingly succomb, seemingly with no resistance, shames and disrespects us all. Perhaps it's irrational to assert more blame for the females who still choose to be ignorant and/or play the submissive, but I do.

And a little note of interest; Since all the destructive blather is being touted under the phony guise of insurance and covering contraception (women's only), I do find it 'interesting' that vasectomies are covered without debate or outcry, never objected to by either the 'churches' or republicans. Hmmm.

Something that really puzzles

kyle flynn — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:17:52 +0000

In reply to It's Settled then: Women We're at War

Something that really puzzles me about this conversation is that erectile dysfunction drugs and therapies (and vasectomies, too) which are covered by insurance are scarcely mentioned. Seems the first two words of any response to objections to the availability of contraception ought to be erectile dysfunction. The hypocrisy is mind numbing.

So, Republicans have no idea

Michael Maiello — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:06:14 +0000

In reply to It's Settled then: Women We're at War

So, Republicans have no idea how insurance works, do they? Your insurance provider doesn't give you anything at "no cost to you." That "free" annual physical you get isn't free, it's covered by your premium. There is no "free" birth control. The cost of it is now covered by the premium. But, hey... my premiums also pay the bonuses of insurance company executives. I guess those are "free" too!

This might be seen as OT, I

AmericanDreamer — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 15:16:22 +0000

In reply to Garry Trudeau is highlighting

This might be seen as OT, I realize, but not so much as I think about it. For the philosophically inclined (meaning those here who occasionally read academic philosophy) I recommend Annette Baier's Moral Prejudices, written in the 1990s. I just finished reading it last night. In addition to being excellent and interesting philosophy in its own right, it raised my consciousness about some of the consequences of the complete domination of ethics, as a branch of philosophy, by men with views and orientations tending to be very different from those of women in ways Baier's book--without engaging in invidious anti-male stereotyping or charges (she finds much to recommend in the philosophy of David Hume, who I believe DanK is knowledgeable about)--really helped me understand much better. I might do a separate blog on this, more likely so if anyone expresses interest privately.

To connect this back with the topic of the thread, witnessing the behavior of middle-aged male state legislators in state after state might be seen as Exhibit A today of what Baier has been writing on this topic of differences (or difference tendencies, if you prefer) in the moral outlooks of women and men.