Much Ado About Binders of Women

| Comments (0)

What is all the commotion about?  Binders of women, of course.  Mitt Romney had the audacity during Tuesday’s presidential debate to mention his concerted effort as Governor of Massachusetts to find female staff members with the help of “binders” of qualified applicants supplied to him by various recruiters and women’s organizations.

Perhaps those outraged by this — Barack Obama and the leading members of his administration (and his mouthpieces in the media) — can be forgiven their misunderstanding of the binder concept, given their sad lack of experience in the private sector, not to mention their lack of executive experience, as well.  Of course they are unfamiliar with the binders, which, just so they know, are not limited solely to those of the female gender.  As many have said in the wake of Governor Romney’s apparently unforgivable binder statement, the review of such binders is common practice within various professional environments.  Perhaps those lacking the necessary professional experience, then, would be wise to use this as a “teachable moment” of which their president is so fond.

I remember clearly my own tour through such a binder four years ago or so.  It was, yes, a binder of women, gathered for a Fortune 500 company seeking staff members with two X chromosomes.  Marveling at the collection of such well-educated, experienced, accomplished women, I remember thinking, “Wow.  Any one of these women is far more qualified to be President of the United States than the woman currently leading in the polls for that office (Hillary Clinton, of course).

Meanwhile, Barack Obama, the man who ultimately defeated Hillary and then claimed the White House, the Obama campaign and the democrat party at large continue to reduce the interests and concerns of America’s women to nothing more than condoms and birth control — and now, they hope, outrage over a binder.  Here’s hoping that 19 days from now they will be realizing just how misguided and self-destructive it is to underestimate and dismiss half the population of the United States.

As Debate Number 2 Nears, Why Aren’t Feminists Gathering Around Their Hillary?

| Comments (0)

With just a few hours to go before Mitt Romney and Barack Obama clash antlers in the second of their three presidential debates, the silence from far too many women on the left is deafening.  Sure, they are squealing that it’s so unfair that a woman is moderating the one debate where the questions come from the audience (yeah, right), but I’m not hearing a peep from them about the fact that Hillary Clinton has announced that she is responsible for the lack of security in Libya that was not only never reported to the White House, but also led to the deaths of four of our Americans one month ago.

No, it’s pretty darn quiet from the feminist camp, other than the chorus of voices, both male and female, insisting that Obama will of course win tonight.  He’s so much better with people than that cold, rich Romney, they proclaim in unison.  I, however, think this is a going to be a tough one for the messiah.  I’ve always found his alleged magnetism, his alleged magical way of connecting with the riff raff, as mysterious as his so-called brilliant oratory skills.  I will forever be haunted by one interchange we witnessed when he was torturing us daily with his campaigning for his beloved Obamacare.  A woman in an audience asked if, under Obamacare, the bureaucrats would consider life force and spirit when determining whether a particular patient would receive treatment.  She used her spry elderly mother’s need for a pacemaker as her example.  “Nope,” Obama told her with an unabashed grin.  “We can’t worry about things like that,” he quipped, his answer fitting perfectly with who I have always believed him to be.  And who I think we will be seeing in the town hall tonight.  One cannot learn to be warm, genuine and compassionate in a week.  Yet the narrative continues in full spin mode, and, as I predicted so wonderfully incorrectly on the eve of the first debate, the lapdogs have already declared Obama tonight’s winner.

Meanwhile, Hillary dresses the wound made by the sword upon which she thrust herself yesterday, but I continue to believe that this is far from over.  Rumor had it this past weekend that Hillary’s hubby was not at all pleased to hear that his wife was to be thrown upon that blade, the buck stopping with her rather than with her boss, and just in time for debate number two.  Her hubby’s former aide Dick Morris predicted several weeks back that Bill may indeed make a cuddly speech for Obama at the convention, but expect another shoe to fall as we near election day.  As few among us rally around the idea that when American lives are at stake, the buck stops with a diplomat rather than with the commander in chief, I think we may be in store for some fireworks in the days ahead.  At least I hope so.  I also think we will once again be seeing a strong, presidential, compassionate Governor Romney in the debate tonight, again revealing who has really waged a war against women — and who has our nation’s best interests at heart.

Our Heroes as Fodder for the Obama/Clinton PR Machine

| Comments (0)

UPDATE 11:26 pm PST:  This just in….Hillary Clinton went off prompter and told reporters earlier today that “what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack,” adding that the four Americans were murdered by “terrorists.”  Those following this story know that the administration has mandated a “senseless violence caused by a video” story line.  Wonder if she cleared this latest comment with her boss.

 

After what seemed a lifetime of watching Hillary Clinton cover for her husband, trashing his conquests and squawking about that “vast right-wing conspiracy,” I have always wondered just how she can look at herself in the mirror at the end of the day.  And now, in the wake of the anti-American fury that has ignited in the Middle East and beyond under her watch, here she is again, covering for a man in the White House.

This time that man is Barack Obama.  He and his Hillary are two peas in a pod, their quest for a weak America having now led to where they are today, sharing the blame for the unstoppable chaos and violence spreading throughout Europe and the Middle East.  What ignites my own fury on this day, however, are the deaths of the Americans we have lost thanks to Obama’s and Clinton’s commitment to our nation’s weakness.  The blood of those Americans is on their hands, and I would hope that perhaps they are finding the tug of that blood just a little bit uncomfortable as it dries.

I myself am haunted by the faces of those men who died on that horrific day less than two weeks ago: a well-meaning ambassador sent out to play nice in a dangerous global hot spot, an information officer who served in the United States Air Force, and two former Navy Seals who lost their lives doing what came naturally to them.  We’re told the Seals were not assigned on the night of the initial attack to protect the ambassador, but they ran headlong in to the fire, because that is what Seals do.  Indeed that is what Americans do.  We see that same fortitude in the face of slain Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, another victim of dangerous, inept Obama policies that have taken from us men we owe for protecting us — despite an adminstration’s attempts to undermine their ability to carry out their duties safely and effectively.

What we see, then, are the faces of Americans placed in harm’s way by politicians who say and do whatever it takes to siphon off this nation’s power to inject it into their own coffers.  Watch as these politicians claim the troubles abroad are simply a justified reaction to an internet video.  We’re sorry, they cry, begging the mob to forgive them via TV commercial.  It’s their fault, they continue, fingering the hateful, foolish Americans they are sworn to represent in the nation that last most of us heard still boasted a God-given right to freedom of expression.

No, I’ll stick with our Seals, our veterans, and the people protecting our borders.  They are America.  And I will honor those we have lost and those who remain on the front lines.  May the blood forever stain the hands of those who stack the odds against them.

Waiting for Left-Wing Apologies to General Petraeus

| Comments (2)

Well, two days have passed since Commander-in-Chief Obama dismissed General Stanley McChrystal and handed control of the Afghanistan theater of the war on terror over to General David Petraeus. Two days, and I have yet to hear an apology from Obama or Hillary or any of their kindred left-wing spirits in Congress, who just months ago referred to General Petraeus as a failure as Commander of the war in Iraq, and joined forces with those who would refer to him gleefully and oh-so-cleverly as General “Betray-us.”

While I am waiting for this apology (and not holding my breath), I imagine what I presume the scene  might have been two days ago in the editorial offices of Rolling Stone. I imagine the staffers, editors and writers gathered around an office television, hanging on the every golden word of their beloved Obama. As soon as they hear that magical announcement — ding, dong, McChrystal is gone — deafening cheers, joyous high-fives and leaps into the air erupt in response, all-out celebration for the death blow they have so successfully dealt the U.S. military.

But then, one in their midst, his eyes and ears still directed toward the tube, calls for them to cease and desist in their revelry. Face ashen and drawn, he calls their attention back to their beloved O. They watch in silence. In shock. They can’t believe what they are hearing. David what? The Betrayer in Afghanistan? No! The celebration has ended as suddenly as it began. And this time, whether they and their fearless leader in the White House care to acknowledge it or not, their nemesis, the U.S. military, won’t be so easily taken down.

In fact, at this very moment rumors are flying that General Petraeus agreed to take over in Afghaniston only on condition that he can alter the notorious rules of engagement that have severely curtailed our warriors’ abilities to carry out their missions and to protect themselves on the ground. I’m sure these rumors have not escaped those Rolling Stone staffers, who, should the rumors prove to be true, fear they won’t have another cause for celebration any time soon.