Well, honey, I do hope you intend to vote absentee, otherwise please be polite enough to pass a few wet-wipes to next person to go into the voting booth behind you.
There has never been a president who knows what it’s like to menstruate, be pregnant, or give birth. There has never been a president who knows what it’s like to be the target of subtle and categorically unsubtle sexism. There has never been a president who was criticized widely for his political ambition, or forced into a bake-off to prove he’s not too career-oriented to cook for his family. There has never been a president who was forced to take his spouse’s last name for appearances’ sake. There has never been a president criticized for showing too much cleavage, or having “cankles,” or wearing unflattering headbands or colorful pantsuits. There has never been a president who was presumed to be mentally and emotionally unstable because of naturally occurring hormones. […]
There are other reasons why I’m ready for Hillary, but even if there weren’t, I would probably still vote for her just because she’s a woman (who belongs to the party I find less odious). And I submit to you that for me, a person who has never been fully represented by an American president in terms of policy or gender, that is a damned solid reason. What’s illogical and ill-considered is not my “vagina vote,” but the ludicrous notion that 226 years of male rule have somehow left us in a position where gender is immaterial. […]
I won’t tell anyone how to vote. But I am telling you, this time, I refuse to shut up when people act as though it’s not enormously important, from a progressive politics perspective, that Hillary Clinton is a woman. I refuse to listen to anyone who warns against “vagina voting,” when I’m 40 years old and have still never had the opportunity to vote with my damned vagina in a general election. American women have been bleeding for over 200 years while men tell us it’s no big deal, and a lot of us have arrived at the point where we just want someone with a visceral, not abstract, concept of what that means.
As Brendan O’Neill points out —
She thinks Hillary would be a great president because she “knows what it’s like to menstruate, be pregnant, [and] give birth.”
So you’re going to pick your leader on the basis of her biological functions, the fact she’s experienced the same bodily stuff as you? Imagine if a man did that. “I’m voting for Ted Cruz because he knows what it’s like to spunk off. And he knows the pain of being kicked in the balls.” We’d think that was a very sad dude indeed. Why is it any better for a female commentator to wax lyrical about voting on the basis of her biological similarity to a candidate rather than any shared political outlook?
The only positive of this utter desperation of Female Supremacists in trying to get Hillary elected by their retreat into the 18th century “women as emotional creatures ruled by their menses” tropes is how clear their tribal agenda is.
sold!
if this hillary person can prove she has a hoohoo she has my vote
cause it’s just damn time you know?
failmerica’s got problems large
it’s time to put a cunt in charge
it’s the logical progression
all else is a microgression
i won’t tell you how to vote
but don’t tell me not to emote
Hillary! Hillary! eff yeah Hillary! omg i’m so moist
I think I speak for every one here when I say that I’ll die slowly in a fire before I vote for Hillary’s crotch.
When Nicolo Machiavelli (whose birthday it is today, praise Jesus) first thought that politics should be built on low and solid ground, and Thomas Hobbes conceptualized Machiavelli’s insight some years later, were either of them thinking that this idea would eventually come to perfection in the microaggressions embodied by Hillary Rodham Clinton’s genital warts, or the even more minimicroaggressions of William Jefferson Clinton’s transmitted HPVs?
Well we might wonder.
off topic but i hadn’t read this elsewheres
The Black Sea is one of the most promising areas in terms of oil. Turkey has opened six deep sea wells in the course of the last 10 years. It’s still in the early stages.
The bottom of the Black Sea is rich in methane hydrate; it’s a gas in a solid form. Russia had only 15 percent of the Black Sea [under its sovereignty] before it included Crimea; now Russia has 36 percent. The only oil and gas discovery in the Black Sea took place in the area surrounding Crimea.
[…]
this part is also kinda interesting:
In the past, the projections for the present days were for the share of oil to decrease and that of natural gas to increase. We were expecting natural gas to replace coal as the second biggest energy resource and then make it to the very top.
But the upward trend of natural gas stopped, and the downward trend of coal reversed. That’s because China entered the picture. China is growing and thanks to its membership in the World Trade Organization, it can sell its products everywhere in the world. As a local energy source, it introduced coal, which had been discredited by the West. But China uses clean coal energy, so it constructs a coal plant each week. China has also become the biggest consumer of energy. The United States’ 100 years dominance in the sector was replaced by China.
[..]
as failmerica circles the shitter drain it’s really interesting to see how the rest of the world just kind keeps on keeping on
oops that last sentence was supposed to be regular not bold cause of that part’s just mho
It’s very likely I will be writing in Mike Rowe in 2016.
Alice cooper for Presudent! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePrsKkpfqzc&sns=em
That should be Shrillary’s theme song.
American women have been bleeding for over 200 years while men tell us it’s no big deal
Valley Forge
Tripoli
Detroit
Veracruz
Gettysburg
Las Guasimas
Belleau Wood
Bataan
Chosin
Hue City
etc.
I think that was the plan feets, dishearten the American spirit and let the commies and socialists catch up.
exactly shermlaw
Since having a vagina is so important, she voted in 2008 for the ticket with a woman, right? Right?
No, of course not: “I would absolutely not prefer the Sarah Palin of gynecologists over the Barack Obama of gynecologists, for perfectly obvious reasons.”
She’s not voting with her vagina. She’s voting her politics. She’s just trying (like liberals did with Obama) to get non-ideologically aligned people to support her candidate.
“The bottom of the Black Sea is rich in methane hydrate; it’s a gas in a solid form.”
Good Lord. A “gas in a solid form” is called a solid, as in “dry ice” or frozen CO2.
Methane hydrate is a clathrate, in which methane is trapped within, essentially, ice (as in H2O ice).
yes yes but i think the thing of it is, if you depressurize it, it’s quite likely to turn gaseous rather quickly, which raises all sorts of engineering conundrums with respect to getting it to the surface for so you can exploit it
but the Japanese are on the case, which means exploited it will be
and America just reported this, which, the long and short of it is, that things are moving more quickly on this front than many had imagined
what this says is that right now, in extremis, this is a viable resource
and it’s only spring of 2015
>“I intend to vote with my vagina.”<
that's gonna leave a yuck factor on the touchscreen
The president has to deal with thugs on the world stage and voting for someone based solely on genitalia is suicidal.
If she thinks more women are needed in elected office to progress women’s issues,she may have more luck with local and state offices. It really isn’t the POTUS job to micromanage the crap she is worried about.
“She’s not voting with her vagina”
So then, she’s just ‘broadening’ her appeal…
*badda-bing*
islam genital mutilation news
Reports of officer shot at Pam Geller’s ‘Muhammad Art Contest’ in Garland, Tx.; Update: Video and photo added from the scene; Update: Local businesses evacuated
>I intend to vote with my vagina.<
you folks out there with the voting booths, i think this may be covered by the "americans with disabilities act"
i just saying squat ready touchscreens may be necessary.
BGBear, the disheartened American spirit is a regression. The communest and fascists aren’t catching up, we are falling to their level.
>I intend to
votedrive with my vagina.<octopussy
>“I intend to vote with my vagina.”<
how are those leftists c@nts in b'more working out?
Unless the damned thing is detachable, she has been “voting with her vagina” every time.
I wonder how her vagina would have had her vote when confronted with a man credibly accused of rape, adultery and sexual assault? Was she reassured by the vagina who chose to Stand By Her Man, while calling all of the other vaginas making the accusation bad names?
http://www.mofopolitics.com/2013/09/27/bill-clinton-a-long-history-of-alleged-rape-and-sexual-assault/
> she has been “voting with her vagina” every time.<
you be making a thigger about dem bitches and hoes
obsessing over sex organs is kinda queer
gay peeps are happy. queer peeps not so much. take back the language.
ie
> queer
queer: Originally pejorative for gay, now being reclaimed by some gay men, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered persons as a self-affirming umbrella term. Caution: still extremely offensive when used as an epithet.
Living within the truth, as humanity’s revolt against an enforced position, is, on the contrary, an attempt to regain control over one’s own sense of responsibility. In other words, it is clearly a moral act, not only because one must pay so dearly for it, but principally because it is not self-serving: the risk may bring rewards in the form of a general amelioration in the situation, or it may not. In this regard, as I stated previously, it is an all-or-nothing gamble, and it is difficult to imagine a reasonable person embarking on such a course merely because he reckons that sacrifice today will bring rewards tomorrow, be it only in the form of general gratitude. (By the way, the representatives of power invariably come to terms with those who live within the truth by persistently ascribing utilitarian motivations to them-a lust for power or fame or wealth-and thus they try, at least, to implicate them in their own world, the world of general demoralization.)
If living within the truth in the post-totalitarian system becomes the chief breeding ground for independent, alternative political ideas, then all considerations about the nature and future prospects of these ideas must necessarily reflect this moral dimension as a political phenomenon. (And if the revolutionary Marxist belief about morality as a product of the “superstructure” inhibits any of our friends from realizing the full significance of this dimension and, in one way or another, from including it in their view of the world, it is to their own detriment: an anxious fidelity to the postulates of that world view prevents them from properly understanding the mechanisms of their own political influence, thus paradoxically making them precisely what they, as Marxists, so often suspect others of being—victims of “false consciousness.”) The very special political significance of morality in the post-totalitarian system is a phenomenon that is at the very least unusual in modern political history, a phenomenon that might well have-as I shall soon attempt to show—far-reaching consequences.<
@havel
link
I’d be willing to bet this woman has voted with her vagina in every election since she was old enough to vote.
Starting with Bill Clinton. Whom, like Nina Burleigh, she would have happily blown, given half the opportunity.
>IN SOCIETIES under the post-totalitarian system, all political life in the traditional sense has been eliminated. People have no opportunity to express themselves politically in public, let alone to organize politically. The gap that results is filled by ideological ritual. In such a situation, people’s interest in political matters naturally dwindles and independent political thought, insofar as it exists at all, is seen by the majority as unrealistic, farfetched, a kind of self-indulgent game, hopelessly distant from their everyday concerns; something admirable, perhaps, but quite pointless, because it is on the one hand entirely utopian and on the other hand extraordinarily dangerous, in view of the unusual vigor with which any move in that direction is persecuted by the regime.
Yet even in such societies, individuals and groups of people exist who do not abandon politics as a vocation and who, in one way or another, strive to think independently, to express themselves and in some cases even to organize politically, because that is a part of their attempt to live within the truth.
The fact that these people exist and work is in itself immensely important and worthwhile. Even in the worst of times, they maintain the continuity of political thought. If some genuine political impulse emerges from this or that “pre-political” confrontation and is properly articulated early enough, thus increasing its chances of relative success, then this is frequently due to these isolated generals without an army who, because they have maintained the continuity of political thought in the face of enormous difficulties, can at the right moment enrich the new impulse with the fruits of their own political thinking. Once again, there is ample evidence for this process in Czechoslovakia. Almost all those who were political prisoners in the early 1970s, who had apparently been made to suffer in vain because of their quixotic efforts to work politically among an utterly apathetic and demoralized society, belong today-inevitably-among the most active Chartists. In Charter 77, the moral legacy of their earlier sacrifices is valued, and they have enriched this movement with their experience and that element of political thinking.
And yet it seems to me that the thought and activity of those friends who have never given up direct political work and who are always ready to assume direct political responsibility very often suffer from one chronic fault: an insufficient understanding of the historical uniqueness of the post-totalitarian system as a social and political reality. They have little understanding of the specific nature of power that is typical for this system and therefore they overestimate the importance of direct political work in the traditional sense. Moreover, they fail to appreciate the political significance of those “pre-political” events and processes that provide the living humus from which genuine political change usually springs. As political actors—or, rather, as people with political ambitions—they frequently try to pick up where natural political life left off. They maintain models of behavior that may have been appropriate in more normal political circumstances and thus, without really being aware of it, they bring an outmoded way of thinking, old habits, conceptions, categories, and notions to bear on circumstances that are quite new and radically different, without first giving adequate thought to the meaning and substance of such things in the new circumstances, to what politics as such means now, to what sort of thing can have political impact and potential, and in what way- Because such people have been excluded from the structures of power and are no longer able to influence those structures directly (and because they remain faithful to traditional notions of politics established in more or less democratic societies or in classical dictatorships) they frequently, in a sense, lose touch with reality. Why make compromises with reality, they say, when none of our proposals will ever be accepted anyway? Thus they find themselves in a world of genuinely utopian thinking.
As I have already tried to indicate, however, genuinely far-reaching political events do not emerge from the same sources and in the same way in the post-totalitarian system as they do in a democracy. And if a large portion of the public is indifferent to, even skeptical of, alternative political models and programs and the private establishment of opposition political parties, this is not merely because there is a general feeling of apathy toward public affairs and a loss of that sense of higher responsibility; in other words, it is not just a consequence of the general demoralization. There is also a bit of healthy social instinct at work in this attitude. It is as if people sensed intuitively that “nothing is what it seems any longer,” as the saying goes, and that from now on, therefore, things must be done entirely differently as well.
If some of the most important political impulses in Soviet bloc countries in recent years have come initially—that is, before being felt on the level of actual power—from mathematicians, philosophers, physicians, writers, historians, ordinary workers, and so on, more frequently than from politicians, and if the driving force behind the various dissident movements comes from so many people in nonpolitical professions, this is not because these people are more clever than those who see themselves primarily as politicians. It is because those who are not politicians are also not so bound by traditional political thinking and political habits and therefore, paradoxically, they are more aware of genuine political reality and more sensitive to what can and should be done under the circumstances.
There is no way around it: no matter how beautiful an alternative political model can be, it can no longer speak to the “hidden sphere,” inspire people and society, call for real political ferment. The real sphere of potential politics in the post-totalitarian system is elsewhere: in the continuing and cruel tension between the complex demands of that system and the aims of life, that is, the elementary need of human beings to live, to a certain extent at least, in harmony with themselves, that is, to live in a bearable way, not to be humiliated by their superiors and officials, not to be continually watched by the police, to be able to express themselves freely, to find an outlet for their creativity, to enjoy legal security, and so on. Anything that touches this field concretely, anything that relates to this fundamental, omnipresent, and living tension, will inevitably speak to people. Abstract projects for an ideal political or economic order do not interest them to anything like the same extent—and rightly so—not only because everyone knows how little chance they have of succeeding, but also because today people feel that the less political policies are derived from a concrete and human here and now and the more they fix their sights on an abstract “someday,” the more easily they can degenerate into new forms of human enslavement. People who live in the post-totalitarian system know only too well that the question of whether one or several political parties are in power, and how these parties define and label themselves, is of far less importance than the question of whether or not it is possible to live like a human being.
To shed the burden of traditional political categories and habits and open oneself up fully to the world of human existence and then to draw political conclusions only after having analyzed it: this is not only politically more realistic but at the same time, from the point of view of an “ideal state of affairs,” politically more promising as well. A genuine, profound, and lasting change for the better—as I shall attempt to show—can no longer result from the victory (were such a victory possible) of any particular traditional political conception, which can ultimately be only external, that is, a structural or systemic conception. More than ever before, such a change will have to derive from human existence, from the fundamental reconstitution of the position of people in the world, their relationships to themselves and to each other, and to the universe. If a better economic and political model is to be created, then perhaps more than ever before it must derive from profound existential and moral changes in society. This is not something that can be designed and introduced like a new car. If it is to be more than just a new variation of the old degeneration, it must above all be an expression of life in the process of transforming itself. A better system will not automatically ensure a better life. In fact, the opposite is true: only by creating a better life can a better system be developed.<
Vote for her vajayjay? Is it running?
I voted with my penis once. I still have to register with the cops.
But seriously, if liberal women must vote for a woman, why not one who doesn’t enable the harassment of women, one who’s not an enabler of dishonesty and corruption not to mention a fuming cesspit of them in her own right, one who’s actually won office in her own right on her own qualifications against experienced opponents instead of gravy-training her husband, one who has marketable skills other than BS and the law (to the extent those are distinguishable from one another), one who could fend for herself in the wild if she had to, one who’s still (relatively) young and (absolutely) attractive?
Palin 2016: We Can Do It!
Vajayjay Armitraj 2016:
“Let the Indian Do It !!”
Speaking of vaginas:
You know, it’s a damn shame when a formerly smart military blog becomes a shadow of it’s former self and starts wallowing in fundamental unseriousness
What is it about teh crazies and their copycats?
. . . who knows what it’s like . . .
. . . to be a bat.
guins, I thought of poor Vijay last night after posting my comment. Something tells me he wouldn’t be a fan of “The Spew.”
But seriously, if liberal women must vote for a woman, why not one who doesn’t enable the harassment of women, one who’s not an enabler of dishonesty and corruption not to mention a fuming cesspit of them in her own right, one who’s actually won office in her own right on her own qualifications against experienced opponents instead of gravy-training her husband, one who has marketable skills other than BS and the law (to the extent those are distinguishable from one another), one who could fend for herself in the wild if she had to, one who’s still (relatively) young and (absolutely) attractive?
Vote for a REPUBLICAN? Are you crazy? They will want those vaginas to actually pay the consequences for their own actions, and who wants that? {/sarc}
Reminisce with Chris
There has never been a president who knows what it’s like to menstruate, be pregnant, or give birth
And that’ll change everything, because babies!
Jesus. There have been female PMs of countries with Parliamentary representation, and Queens of monarchies.
They’re not any different from men in any important way.
It’s shrews like this wot cause unrest that make you wanna take ‘way the vote from wimmin.
Oh no, I don’t in any way want to take away the vote from women. Never. I would like to take away the stupid and ignorant from women however, albeit that will require their cooperation in improving themselves.
Letting the stupid and ignorant vote seems the right thing to do but, I just didn’t expect so many of them to do so.
I fear that the stupid-and-ignorant may not be detachable without mussing up with the hormones and stuff.
Thing is, any man that has lived with women know how they routinely lose all reason for a time. Then, they go back to subjecting reason to the emotions of the heart.
How come no one talks of the founding fathers wisdom in whom they believed voting rights be limited to?
And please, no crap about racism and slavery. Despite common indoctrination, not only Africans were enslaved. No, really.
Thing is, of course, marriage and family in general, and gender roles especially were a whole different concept at that time, and probably until WWI.
Impossible to return to those times of course, but the idea of limits on voting rights needs to be strongly reinstituted I think. A voter at minimum should be able to complete a short test on civics, in English, for example.
A voter at minimum should be able to complete a short test on civics, in English, for example
That’s not fair, many congresscritters wouldn’t be able to vote for themselves.
Lee
I’d limit the franchise, too, but not by sex. But by skin-in-the-game … e.g. On welfare? No vote.
P.S. I was more politically aware and up on current events at 12 than most college students. Dad started me reading newspapers at 10 and we discussed what we read over the dinner table each night.
I just hope that the touch-screen doesn’t short-circuit. Unless she wants to die bold.
Vote with My Vagina
Sung to the tune of “The Wells Fargo Wagon”
O-ho I vote with my vagina votin’ Hillary,
Cause she has something special for me
O-ho I vote with my vagina votin’ Hillary,
Cause she can get to Billy for me
I just sent a million to my friend Bill Clinton
I wish that he would run but it can’t be
When you’re disbarred and fighting every scandal
Your front gal should be my Hillary
O-ho I vote with my vagina votin’ Hillary,
Cause she has something special for me
Could be an Arms deal,
Urainium.
Or a Nobel Peace Prize
Or it could be
Yes, it could be
Yes, you’re right it surely could be
Somethin’ special
Somethin’ very, very special now
Just for me!