Showing posts with label John Hawkins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label John Hawkins. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 22, 2009

How to Offend a Woman

Tell her she's "emotional," as does John Hawkins:
The old feminine ideal was the woman who got married to a good man, stayed home, took care of their house, took care of the kids, and took pride in making the whole family function.
Now, look at the messages women get from popular culture: Dress like a fashion model, cat around like the women from Sex in the City, get married, have a beatiful house, have 2.5 kids, have a career that’s every bit as successful and fulfilling as your husband’s, and still look like a professional actress, even when you’re 60 years old.
There are only so many hours in a day, days in a week, and weeks in a year and there just isn’t time for most women to do all that. Granted, there are a few who manage to pull it off — or at least seem to do it to the outside world.
But, the reality is that most people have skills, abilities, desires, and wants that they never fulfill — women, in part because of their emotional natures, are just made to feel worse about not living up to the hype of what modern feminism says a woman should be. (Emphasis added.)
As soon as you tell a woman she's emotional, she will . . . er, become emotional:
This is a lot of words to say that I think it’s wrong to dismiss the loss to the individual woman and to society when a woman doesn’t use her gifts and talents just as I think it is a loss to the individual man and to society when a man doesn’t involve himself with his child’s life.
OK, sweetheart. Now that you're done with that, how about you run along and fix me a cup of coffee?

(John, you can thank me later for taking the heat off you. Being the most-hated man in the blogosphere is a tough job, but somebody's got to do it.)

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

NRSC's John Cornyn Keeps Fumbling Away GOP's Senate Chances for 2010

The halfwit senator from Texas, whose wrong-headed interference in the Florida primary sparked the Not One Red Cent rebellion against the National Republican Senatorial Committee, has continued his campaign to destroy what little hope remains of the Republican Party's hope for gaining Senate seats in the 2010 mid-term election. John Hawkins of Right Wing News reports:
After [the Charlie Crist] endorsement, the NRSC continued meddling in primaries, but they've done it more subtly. In California, I've been told that Cornyn has told private donor gatherings that Carly Fiorina is the NRSC's choice. Why keep it below the radar like that? To try to cut off funds to Chuck Devore without catching the attention of blogs like this one.
The NRSC is also infuriating Republicans in Colorado with these same kind of the behind the scenes moves . . .
"The chairman of the Colorado Republican Party says he plans to inform a national GOP group today that it created a 'backlash' by registering two domain names for potential U.S. Senate candidate Jane Norton." . . . .
How dare these arrogant jackasses at the NRSC disrespect Republicans across the country be interfering in these primaries? I know what they're thinking, "2010 is going to be a good year. We'll win some seats no matter what and then everyone will agree that we were smart to interfere." . . .
Please read John Hawkins' entire column and send a message to John Cornyn and those treacherous sellout swine at the NRSC:

NOT ONE RED CENT!

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

John Hawkins, take that back!

John Hawkins lists the 10 Hottest Liberal Women in Politics, with Kirsten Powers at No. 1, an insult to my girl, Chelsea Clinton, who ranked a mere fourth.

This derogation of Chelsea was compounded by his ranking Jessica Valenti (!) as No. 2.

Look, John, I've met Chelsea Clinton. Chelsea Clinton told me my sons were "cute." She even signed an autograph for them! And . . . well, does the phrase "much back" mean anything to you? (Me and Sir Mix-a-Lot like it like that.)

I'm not going to argue much about Kirsten Powers, even though I've met Kirsten. She's pretty, but not . . . well, she's nowhere near as alluring as Chelsea. (Such eyes! Such a smile! And a lovely complexion, too.) But I suppose if you go for that fake-blonde thing, and you are near-sighted, you might prefer Kirsten to Chelsea.

De gustibus non disputam. But . . . Jessica Freaking Valenti? Oh, John, don't say that. Don't ever say that.