TIM ROWLAND SHOULD JUST STOP WRITING ABOUT POLITICS

     Hit and Run Rowland (HR2) has struck again in a column entitled "Republican male politicians, just stop talking about women", attacking the Party of which he falsely claims to belong (in the full sense of the word belong). I call him HR2 because he writes mostly negative inflammatory pieces about Conservative individuals and the Republican Party, then he hides refusing to answer comments or engage in a discussion.  He rarely writes about issues, writing only about what has already been sensationalized in the Liberal mainstream media. His column is like reading a political version of The National Enquirer where issues are avoided and personal attacks are encouraged. He really should stick to writing about farm animals.
    Today he blathered about the Republican Party's misunderstanding of women and their alleged War on Women. He offers three "proofs" of Republican misogyny, which are the most over-used attempts of the media to try to inflame the public against Conservatives.

1.  Birth control (Republicans think women are sluts)
2.  Legitimate rape (one goofy politician)
3.  Christianity and the concept of  "submission to one's husband"


"I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”
Rush Limbaugh
   

     The first issue that was left out of Rowland's article is birth control and who pays for it, and most recently who must supply it against their religious beliefs. Like the saying goes, "I still don't know how someone's reproductive system can simultaneously be 0% my business but 100% my financial responsibility." Many taxpayers object to paying for other's birth control.  Most recently, based on their religious beliefs, a group of nuns and the Catholic Church fought against Obamacare's mandate for them to supply birth control to their employees. This is  a very reasonable argument. Most mainstream religions would consider an unmarried woman fighting for birth control as wrong or promiscuous behavior. Did Rush go too far by stating that the young woman who was fighting for free birth control "must be a slut"? Yes...and guess what?...he apologized.

[crickets chirping]
Dave Letterman, Bill Maher, et al

    Now here is the hypocrisy of the Left that Rowland also left out of his article: Liberals have publicly called  Sarah Palin and her daughter sluts without apology and even refused to condemn those that did. Palin has also been called a c@#t. She has been deemed deserving of having men deficate into her mouth. Her special needs child was said not to be hers, not to be her husbands, and called a retard. Hustler did a porn movie about her called, "Who's Nailin' Paylin?" and Eminem rapped about sex with Palin in "We Made You." Where was the outrage from the Left? Why doesn't Rowland write about it?

We should not judge all Muslims by the actions of a few terrorists. It is OK to judge the Republican Party by one ignoramus who happens to be a Republican.
   
    The second issue that was left out of Rowland's article is abortion and whether it is morally acceptable in cases of rape. One ignorant Republican stated that if it was a legitimate [actual] rape that no pregnancy would result. This is clearly one misinformed, misguided, and ignorant individual who happens to be a Republican. I don't know him. I know many, many Republicans, and I can state without reservation that I have never met one who would agree with that statement, nor do I. Yet, this one statement by one individual is used shamelessly in an attempt to prove that Republicans hate women. It was a valid question about an issue that has been debated for decades. I might add that statistics show that less than 1% of abortions are due to rape or incest. Rowland thought it would be cool to use this one statement to flippantly sully "his peeps" the Republicans. This is called a legitimate writing skill?
   
This is one of the most misrepresented tenants of the Christian faith used to divide Americans and further an agenda.

     The third issue that was left out of Rowland's article is the Christian precept that "wives should submit to their husbands." This is also a Jewish and a Muslim precept. Of course all three major religions have devotees that range from modern to orthodox. It is disingenuous to attach this thought only to fundamentalist Christian Republicans. This is one of the most misrepresented tenants of the Christian faith used to divide Americans and further an agenda. Those who use it always intentionally leave out the part where husbands are to lay down their lives for their wives like Christ did for the church. In other words it is a two-way street of giving and preferring one another over one's self. Liberals make it sound like Christian Republicans actually believe in wife rape, battery, slavery, abuse, forced pregnancy, with no choice of a career or the pursuit of happiness. Are you kidding me? Do you know the fabulous, intelligent, educated, gifted, motivated, and successful Republican/Conservative women that I know? The only ones that I know that treat Conservative women that way are Liberals! Again, this was used by Rowland in an attempt to cleverly brand all  men on the Right as Neanderthals.
   Here again is the hypocrisy of the Left, also not mentioned in Rowland's article.  Liberals have shown that they cannot conceive of the notion of submitting to anyone in a decision-making process. I certainly have seen that. However, they don't mind at all forcing their wives to submit to public humiliation.  She is made to face the public with a smile when her Liberal politician husband publicly announces that their marriage has been a complete sham (only after getting caught) and that he is actually gay... or when her Liberal politician husband gets caught getting BJs in the Oval Office...or when her Liberal politician husband gets caught twice sexting with other women...or when her Liberal politician husband has been caught in an affair that resulted in a love child, even while she--the wife--is dying of cancer. They were all forced to submit to degrading themselves in public for the cause of Liberal politics.


The real acts of war against women...


1. Ted Kennedy, one of the heroes of the Left,  was driving drunk and drove off of a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island where his car was submerged in water. He saved himself, leaving his passenger  Mary Jo Kopechne to drown.  He was married with 3 children, which is probably why he did not report the accident and that Kopechne was in the car for almost 10 hours! His constant selfish behavior humiliated his wife to the point that she drank herself into alcoholism in order to cope.

2. Bill Clinton, the rock star of the Left, took advantage of a 21-year old female intern. He was the most powerful man in the world at the time and at least 20 years her senior. It was revealed that he used her to get oral sex in the oval office. He then demonized the young girl and her girlfriend who had the audacity to expose his behavior. Talk about sexual harassment on the job! There are about a dozen women who made allegations of his aggressive sexual behavior over many years beginning when he was the governor of Arkansas. Each time the woman was threatened by his cronies, ruined publicly, or silenced in some way. He lied about Monica Lewinsky and when he knew he couldn't get away with it any longer he ruined her life making her the laughing stock of the country. All of this while his wife was forced to stand by him publicly.

3. The Left promotes abortion at any time in a woman's pregnancy, performed in any place (doesn't have to be a hospital), by anyone (does not need to be an M.D.) without allowing them to see a sonogram or receive counseling about how they will deal with this act for the rest of their lives. This is considered a kindness towards women?

4. The Left claims to support women yet they set out to destroy and dismiss any successful woman who happens to be a Conservative. If they can't prove her to be an adulteress or a enticer of men, they attack her intelligence and characterize her as an idiot. So-called women's groups do not ever rise to defend them.

   Did Tim Rowland write anything of substance in this piece about Republicans? The article was just full of silly frill and fluff with no facts and no depth of opinion. Will he respond to comments?  Never.
   The Herald Mail should allow the local TEA Party to have a column where issues would be debated and discussed openly and intelligently. They cancelled Mail Call in an attempt to improve the image of the city. The next obvious step is to cancel Rowland and/or provide a new column written by a local who is not afraid to take comments and discuss and defend what they write.

I am a liberated Conservative woman! Come on Ol' Hit and Run Rowland...bring it on!!








 

Can a Woman be Both Liberated and Conservative?

  I'm well into my fifth decade and I've crammed a lot into each of them, so I'm not sure where to start. I know there are many skeptics that a woman can be both liberated and conservative. I set out to be liberated before I had any concept of the liberal-conservative divide in this country. I was only 18 years old in 1977 when I started my first job as an electronic technician in a male saturated lab at Bendix Field Engineering Corporation. There were two other young women hired at the same time and we were the first females to work there. They sat us in a corner with wire wrap guns, wirewrapping empty chassis that would never be used. Busy work. The other two left in a week or two. I battled it out in that lab for about two and a half years before applying for a job posting as a jr. engineering writer.
   It was a maintenance and repair lab that was divided into two sections: digital and analog. After a couple of days of mindless wirewrapping I asked my supervisor when he intended to put me to work. I could see in his body language and dismissive answers that he had no intention of  letting me do anything but fill a quota. I found this to be terribly demeaning. I had been the only girl in my vocational technical school in the electronics program and I had been treated as an equal. It had not even occurred to me that I would be treated so poorly. The men were slobbering flirts and that was offensive, but the worst insult was to be deemed useless and not to be given the chance to earn my salary. I put down the wirewrap gun and demanded a real work assignment.
   As luck would have it I was given a workbench in the digital section of the lab. Digital was relatively new and I had no idea at the time how valuable this experience woud be. At first all of the techs had their test equipment that had been fought for or won upon the departure of another tech and no one wanted to let me use it, not even for a couple of hours.  I kept patrolling the lab asking each person if they were finsished with that power supply or this oscilloscope, but everyone claimed that they were still using the equipment and would be indefinitely. I remember asking one of the guys if I was supposed to shit a power supply. He was shocked, but it was definitely an ice-breaker. After about a half a day of this, equipment suddenly started to show up on my bench.
   That was the beginning of my battle to become liberated. Actually it started much younger as I had other situations from which I needed to be liberated, but that's another topic and another story. My first real conflict of being a conservative woman (even though I didn't know it yet) while fighting for equal rights in the workplace came in the form of a pro-choice march about a year after I took the job as a jr. writer at Bendix. I worked with my first real-life lesbian and became fast friends with her and her partner. They were all fired up about taking part in this march and they assumed that I would be too. I had never given much thought to the abortion issue to know where I stood on it. I need to know where I stand before I fight for or against something, but once I do I am all in!
   I stalled giving them an answer as to if I would be going with them to the march. I remembered several girls in middle school and high school who had an abortion and even multiple abortions. I had become a Christian (joined a commune) at age 14 (another story for later), and although I had begun to significantly stray from my faith I still had it down at my core. I came to the decision that I could not support it or go to that march. My girlfriends told me that I was confused and that I should go and be a part of it until I figured it all out, but I knew that I couldn't do it. So I am a young woman in a man's career field, a card carrying member of NOW, living life according to my own rules, but I could not tow the line for abortion rights. My girlfriends and I handled it with respect for one another. It wasn't as uncivil between women back then. They didn't call me names or say that I was bad for the women's movement. We were friends with different ideas on one issue. Women deal harshly with one another now when you don't fit in their box.
   I can see how this blogging thing could become addictive. I've always been told that I should write a book. That seemed too daunting a task to do while living a jam packed life. Maybe these little snip its will add up and give me the discipline to write more. After all, I am in the decade of my life where I am feeling like anything is possible!

Bendix badge 1977