cliton has nothing for fathers

[Robbie]

cliton has nothing for fathers
Posted by: "Carri Simms" carri_simms@yahoo.com   carri_simms
Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:27 am (PST)
Clinton makes closing argument to women

MANCHESTER, N.H. - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday made her closing argument to female voters in a message that could be reduced to three words.

You. Go. Girl.
Clinton, standing in a lobby of a YWCA, told undecided mothers and their daughters that her agenda for families and children is the most aggressive to help them. She touted her family care and child care tax credits designed to lessen the burden on working women.
"We can do a better job in supporting families than we do right now," Clinton said. "We give a lot of lip service to family values, but we've never really valued families in a way that we can."
Clinton, on the last of a two-day trip to this early voting state, tailored her message and appearances to female voters with whom she enjoys a sizable lead in the contest for the Democratic presidential nomination. She bests rival Barack Obama, 42 percent to 25 percent among women in the latest CNN-WMUR poll conducted by the University of New Hampshire. She leads overall in that poll, 38 percent to 26 percent.

A separate New Hampshire poll, released Friday from USA Today and Gallup, showed Clinton and Obama tied at 32 percent each of Democrats overall. Her outreach to women underscores the tightness of the race in this first-in-the-nation presidential primary state and the support she is trying to cement in case she falters in Iowa's three-way race.

Iowa's presidential caucuses are Jan. 3, followed by New Hampshire's primary on Jan. 8.
With daughter Chelsea and mother Dorothy Rodham in tow, Clinton's four-event schedule highlighted what could be a history-making nomination. As her campaign released a list of 3,500 female supporters, she said there are too many challenges facing working mothers.

"We put so many burdens on families trying to do the right thing, trying to take care of their families," Clinton said.

She cited her time as a young mother in Little Rock, Ark.
"When I was a young lawyer and also a mom, I learned how difficult it was for a lot of the other women who worked in the law firm — the secretaries, the paralegals. At 3 o'clock every day, they'd all be on the phone, whispering to make sure their children were there safely. ... It was just such a time of tension and concern to make sure they got home."
Clinton highlighted her proposals to help working women with young children or who — like Clinton — take care of their parents.

"She's going to hit the ground running," said Barbara Marzelli, a mother whose son benefited from a children's health program Clinton supported. "She has the experience, the strength and the commitment — and above all, a heart — to lead the country."

Clinton also turned back to her book, "It Takes a Village." She said families have to work together to strengthen their relationships.

"It sounds incredibly old fashioned, but having a meal together really makes a difference. It stabilizes your children during the day. It gives them a chance to interact with the family. It is something that has become harder and harder because of work hours and expectations," Clinton said, noting she and her husband made an effort to have at least one meal with Chelsea when she was younger.

"That kind of investment is every parent would like to be able to do, but so many parents can't."

---> as long as you are a single mother with a daughter you will have a place in Hillary's America" -

[Robbie]

Re: cliton has nothing for fathers
Posted by: "Kenyatte Hay" kenyatteg@yahoo.com   kenyatteg
Sun Dec 23, 2007 4:31 am (PST)
I think the movement is changing me... everytime i hear politcians address woman, blacks, men, muslims, christians, etc... I just see prejudice/racism and Klans in sheets.

[Robbie]

Re: Hillary Clinton Family Hypocrisy
Posted by: "Lisa" lisahciam@yahoo.com   lisahciam
Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:30 am (PST)
I think she means a village of women! Who needs the dad, right???

Send letters to the editor and as why he isn't in jail or why his
wages are not being garnished, or why there isn't a "attachment" to
his bank account. Why does he still have his driver's license?
Professional license?

[Robbie]

  FW: hillary clinton
Posted by: "Bob Norton" condor68@comcast.net   condor69y
Sun Jan 6, 2008 4:25 pm (PST)
Hillary is touting her "experience" like the "patriot" Act which strips
Americans of their constitutional rights claims non supporters are not
patriots. This tactic of naming bills and other things based on what they
are not is a common gov't ploy. Read Animal Farm and other political satires
and we see how gov't intentional distorts language.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE: None of us should call child "support" anything but "Child
extortion". It is a far more accurate term. Your children are kidnapped and
you are forced to send money to the kidnappers under threat of jail when you
are a fit parent who wants to take care of your children in your own home.
Our children have been made into a profit center for your ex and the state
government. It is a racket like no other that trades in babies and children
not unlike slave trade - only you are the slave who's earnings the gov't
wants to capture.

"Best Interest of the Children", "Guardian Ad Litem", "Family Service
Workers", "Family Court" and many other terms have become the opposite of
what they were allegedly created for today.

Hillary has no appropriate experience to run the country. No management of a
budget, no true leadership (except a failed health care attempt as first
lady), no experience running a state, or even small city, no experience with
foreign affairs, military experience, business experience (unless you count
Whitewater and shady commodity trades that gave her illegal donations). She
is a joke and anyone that votes for here is being fooled or voting to back a
woman. Be serious.

From: romesburgt@aol.com [mailto:romesburgt@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 06, 2008 2:58 PM
To: godbless@bentcom.net; gitlotty@verizon.net; gregd956@yahoo.com;
buzabuz@msn.com; condor68@comcast.net; civilman008@aol.com;
bnbcousins@yahoo.com; LDUNCAN1@wpahs.org; jeffd9280@yahoo.com;
donlut64@localnet.com; denise.miller@areva-td.com; Deedel11@aol.com;
daydreamer8304@yahoo.com; ediethomas@netzero.net; jblankenbehler@yahoo.com;
keith.owen@oh.f4j.us; macdonald@atlanticbb.net; meredmobile@yahoo.com;
PaulHWerner@aol.com; pittsburghstorm@yahoo.com; Policeman690@hotmail.com;
spudnik1@comcast.net; swpghguy@hotmail.com; terry3150@yahoo.com;
WabiMulson@aol.com
Subject: Fwd: hillary clinton

-----Original Message-----
From: LeesaEze@aol.com
To: celene.mitchell@comcast.net; RomesburgT@aol.com; shell3062@verizon.net;
slider3@atlanticbb.net; vernahimes@yahoo.com; jkeefer1k@peoplepc.com;
Junepoetswoman@aol.com; WALMGAL@aol.com
Sent: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 8:41 am
Subject: hillary clinton

>> Subject: A good one!!!
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> In a news conference Deanna Favre announced she will
> >> be the starting QB for the Packers this coming Sunday.
> >> Deanna asserts that she is qualified to be starting
> >> QB because she has spent the past 16 years married to
> >> Brett while he played QB for the Packers.
> >>
> >> During this period of time she became familiar with
> >> the definition of a corner blitz, and is now
> >> completely comfortable with other terminology of the
> >> Packers offense. A survey of Packers fans shows that
> >> 65 % of those polled supported the move.
> >>
> >> Does this sounds idiotic and unbelievable to you?
> >> Well, Hillary Clinton makes the same claims as to why
> >> she is qualified to be President and 50% of democrats
> >> polled agreed. She has never run a City, County, or
> >> State.
> >>
> >> When told Hillary Clinton has experience because she
> >> has 8 years in the white house, Dick Morris stated "so
> >> has the pastry chef".
> >>

[PR]

  Re: Assessing Iowa Presidential Caucus Results
Posted by: "bitjuglr" bitjuglr@yahoo.com   bitjuglr
Sat Jan 5, 2008 7:53 am (PST)

The Iowa Caucuses are a quaint anacronism; and it'd be ill-advised to
draw any conclusions from them.

To say that Joe Biden's support of VAWA bought him 1% o fthe vote is
like saying that Hillary's support of VAWA bought her 29% of the vote;
or bought Obama 38% of the vote. Biden's simply an irrelevant candidate
on the national level. At this early stage there's roughly a three-way
split of the Democrat vote. About all that Iowa did on the democrat side
was shake out the chaff and narrow it down to three finalists.

Defining Hillary as a radical feminist first requires defining what a
"radical" feminist is. "Radical" feminism doesn't fall into one of the
widely-recognized schools such as gender, egalitarian, socialist, or
individualist feminism. There's a wikipedia entry for radical feminism
but it seems written primarily by anti-feminists wishing to disparage
any feminist inclination.

One thing that does come to mind in looking at the Democrat side of
presidential politics though, is that both the last serving Democrat
president and the leader from the Democrat Iowa Caucuses were both
raised by their mothers without any noticable participation from their
biological fathers.

On the Republican side, I think you have to go through New Hampshire
before you see the same kind of separation of the chaff from wheat that
the Democrats achieved in Iowa. I think the Republican party is much
more fractionalized than the Democrat party right now; and in Iowa what
you saw was the socially conservative fraction coming out.

By the way, what happened to the Klein campaign?

--- In Fathers-4-Justice@yahoogroups.com, adoptaowl@... wrote:
Assessing Iowa Presidential Caucus Results
The letter below was published in The Washington Times on Saturday
January 5, 2008 followed by the article to which it responds.
Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D.
-----
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/EDITO\
RIAL/221244327/1013&template=nextpage
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080105/EDIT\
ORIAL/221244327/1013&template=nextpage> _
Assessing Iowa presidential caucus results
Gender politics may well be the most overlooked determinant of the Iowa
outcomes ("Huckabee, Obama win in Iowa," Page 1, Friday). First,
radical feminist Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton discovered that she
largely has become irrelevant to women, let alone men. Second, Mr.
Domestic Violence, Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., discovered that his
support of the Violence Against Women Act -- which has destroyed more
fathers, children, and families than any other congressional act -- got
him exactly 1 percent of the Iowa vote.
Third, while it would be "greatly exaggerated" to call political
correctness dead in Iowa, it clearly is not winning. To see why, read
the recently published book by David Paul Kuhn, "The Neglected Voter:
White Men and the Democratic Dilemma."
In my view, the only inherently defensible position is gender equality,
and I would urge all candidates to break with political correctness and
demand equality for boys and men as well as for girls and women.
GORDON E. FINLEY
Professor of psychology
Florida International University
Miami
-----
http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080103/NATION/423265890/1002
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20080103/NATION/423265890/1002>
Huckabee, Obama win Iowa races
By David Espo and Mike Glover - Sen. Barack Obama, bidding to become the
nation's first black president, captured the Iowa caucuses Thursday
night, the opening test in the race for the 2008 Democratic nomination.
Mike Huckabee rode a wave of support from evangelical Christians to
victory in the Republican caucuses.

[PR]

  Re: Assessing Iowa Presidential Caucus Results
Posted by: "Steve" svanos2@fuse.net   smolensk1
Sat Jan 5, 2008 10:29 am (PST)
Are you aware that no one that voted in the caucus were required to
prove that they meet the qualifications to vote in it? And that people
were allowed to register to vote at the door on the Democratic side? In
effect, any candidate could have bussed people in from another state and
they could have voted without having to prove their Iowa residency.
This is per Michael Savage on the radio last night. So what do the
results mean? NOTHING.

Steve

[PR]

  Hillary Desperate
Posted by: "bob batterbee" bobbatterbee@yahoo.com   bobbatterbee
Tue Jan 8, 2008 5:09 am (PST)
Years ago I worked with comedian Thea Vidal when 2
guys stood up during her show an shouted racial
remarks. She ripped them apart the place was laughing
as the bouncers took the men to the door. After the
last show Thea told me she does that at least one
night in every city ,hire a couple guys off the street
to come in and shout because it makes for a good show.
Police during demonstrations show up in plain clothes
and shout at protesters while holding rocks ,it give
uniform police an excuse to break up the demo. Hil
seems to be following the same desperate logic.

Protesters ask Clinton to iron shirts

Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign stop was interrupted
Monday when two men stood in the crowd and began
screaming, "Iron my shirt!" during one of her final
appearances before the New Hampshire primary.

Clinton, a former first lady running to become the
nation's first female president, laughed at the
seemingly sexist protest that suggested a woman's
place is doing the laundry and not running the
country.

"Ah, the remnants of sexism — alive and well," Clinton
said to applause in a school auditorium.

The two men were removed from the hall after raising a
pair of signs that said, "Iron my shirt!" They also
shouted the same slogan.

"Can we turn the lights on? It's awfully dark,"
Clinton said, cueing the lights to come and police to
come forward to take the men away.

The overflow crowd burst into applause and some began
shouting, "Iron my shirt" as the two were taken from
the hall.

"As I think has been abundantly demonstrated, I am
also running to break through the highest and hardest
glass ceiling," she said.

EqualisEqual.com

[PR]

Politics and Misogyny - New York Times article‏
From:    Harry Crouch (harryal@earthlink.net)
Sent:    Tue 1/15/08 9:43 PM
To:    Harry Crouch (harryal@earthlink.net)

FYI

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/opinion/15herbert.html

 

 

New York Times

January 15, 2008

Op-Ed Columnist
Politics and Misogyny

By BOB HERBERT

With Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s win in New Hampshire, gender issues are suddenly in the news. Where has everybody been?

If there was ever a story that deserved more coverage by the news media, it’s the dark persistence of misogyny in America. Sexism in its myriad destructive forms permeates nearly every aspect of American life. For many men, it’s the true national pastime, much bigger than baseball or football.

Little attention is being paid to the toll that misogyny takes on society in general, and women and girls in particular.

Its forms are limitless. Hard-core pornography is a multibillion-dollar business, having spread far beyond the stereotyped raincoat crowd to anyone with a laptop and a password. Crowds of crazed photographers risk life and limb to get shots of Paris Hilton or Britney Spears without their underwear. At New York Jets home games, men regularly gather at Gate D to urge female fans to expose themselves.

In its grimmest aspects, misogyny manifests itself in hideous violence — from brutal beatings and rape to outright torture and murder. Fifteen months ago, a gunman invaded an Amish schoolhouse in rural Pennsylvania, separated the girls from the boys, and then shot 10 of the girls, killing five.

The cable news channels revel in stories about women (almost always young and attractive) who come to a gruesome end at the hands of violent men. The stories seldom, if ever, raise the issue of misogyny, which permeates not just the crimes themselves, but the coverage as well.

The latest of these obsessively covered stories concerned a pregnant marine, Maria Frances Lauterbach, who had complained to authorities that she had been raped by a fellow marine. Her body was found last week buried in a backyard fire pit in North Carolina.

It just so happens that the Democratic presidential candidates are campaigning this week in the misogyny capital of America: Nevada. It’s a perfect place to bring up the way women are viewed and treated in this society, but don’t hold your breath. Presidential wannabes are hardly in the habit of insulting the locals.

Prostitution is legal in much of Nevada and heavily promoted even where it’s not. In Las Vegas, where prostitution is illegal but flourishes nevertheless, Mayor Oscar Goodman has said that creating a series of legal, “magnificent” brothels would be a great development tool for his city.

The fundamental problem in all of this is that women and girls are dehumanized, opening the floodgates to every kind of mistreatment. “Once you dehumanize somebody, everything else is possible,” said Taina Bien-Aimé, executive director of the women’s advocacy group Equality Now.

A grotesque exercise in the dehumanization of women is carried out routinely at Sheri’s Ranch, a legal brothel about an hour’s ride outside of Vegas. There the women have to respond like Pavlov’s dog to an electronic bell that might ring at any hour of the day or night. At the sound of the bell, the prostitutes have five minutes to get to an assembly area where they line up, virtually naked, and submit to a humiliating inspection by any prospective customer who has happened to drop by.

If you don’t think this is an issue worthy of a presidential campaign, consider the scandalous way that women are treated in the military and the fact that the winner of this election will become the commander in chief.

The sexual mistreatment of women in the military is widespread. The Defense Department financed a study in 2003 of female veterans seeking health assistance from the Department of Veterans Affairs. Nearly a third of those surveyed said they had been the victim of a rape or attempted rape during their service.

The Associated Press reported in 2006 that more than 80 military recruiters had been disciplined over the course of a year because of sexual misconduct with young women and girls who had considered joining the military.

There continue to be widespread complaints from women about rape and other forms of sexual attacks in the military, and about a culture that tends to protect the attackers.

To what extent are the candidates of either party concerned about these matters? Do they have any sense of how extensive and debilitating the mistreatment of women and girls really is?

We’ve become so used to the disrespectful, degrading, contemptuous and even violent treatment of women that we hardly notice it. Staggering amounts of violence are unleashed against women and girls every day. Fashionable ads in mainstream publications play off of that violence, exploiting themes of death and dismemberment, female submissiveness and child pornography.

If we’ve opened the door to the issue of sexism in the presidential campaign, then let’s have at it. It’s a big and important issue that deserves much more than lip service.

Harry Crouch

Founder/Director, California Men's Centers

President, National Coalition of Free Men San Diego (NCFM-SD)

932 C Street, Suite B

San Diego, CA 92101

619-231-1909

California Men's Center San Diego

http://www.californiamenscenters.org

Mensbiz

http://mensbiz.net/

Mensbiz Shops (great advocacy products)

http://www.cafepress.com/mensbiz

PaternityFraudDNA - find out who Dad really is, contact us for a DNA test

http://www.paternityfrauddna.com/

Children's Rights Initiative for Sharing Parents Equally

http.//www.crispe.org

[Robbie]

 [Shatteredmen] Finally, a democrat considers the male voter!!!
Posted by: "Robert Gipson" armyrangerarmyranger@yahoo.com   armyrangerarmyranger
Tue Apr 1, 2008 7:23 pm (PDT)
I good speach or a fools day??

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Sam Sanders <ntbsam@yahoo.com>
To: Shatteredmen@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 5:52:05 PM
Subject: Re: [Shatteredmen] Finally, a democrat considers the male voter!!!

My new e-mail is gullible@stupid.com

----- Original Message ----
From: Sam Sanders <lutn@charter.net>
To: Shatteredmen@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 3:35:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Shatteredmen] Finally, a democrat considers the male voter!!!

Was the following act of domestic violence covered ANYWHERE when it happened? Did I miss something?

----- Original Message ----
From: Ray Blumhorst <gottkinder@sbcglobal.net>
To: shatteredmen@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 1, 2008 2:27:02 PM
Subject: [Shatteredmen] Finally, a democrat considers the male voter!!!

Men’s Issues Matter Too - by Hillary Clinton*

April 1, 2008

The following is a transcript of the speech given by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton at the California Men’s Center this morning:

Welcome. It is good to see you all here this morning.

Firstly, I would like to thank the National Coalition of Free Men, and Harry Crouch, director of the California Men’s Center, for inviting me here to speak today.

As you all probably know, I have long been an advocate for women’s rights and issues. However, it has become increasingly clear to me during my presidential campaign that I have overlooked the issues that American men face. Well, I have done some soul searching on these issues, and have had a change of heart in my approach toward gender politics. After all, men’s issues matter too, and I will now detail my new ideas here.

I have said that it takes a village to raise a child. And a vital part of that village is men and fathers that are valued for their involvement in the families of that village. As president I will urge the states to reform their family courts to encourage shared parenting so that fathers are no longer routinely excluded from their children’s lives or treated as criminals in family court.

After all, no man is illegal.

I have said that women are the primary victims of war. After men, that is. Really, men have borne the brunt of war for time immemorial. Just look at the law that requires Selective Service registration for 18-year-old men, but not 18-year-old women. It’s high time that young women in America did their part for national defense by registering as well, and as president I plan to promote legislation to this end.

I have spoken of a woman’s right to choose. It’s only fair that reproductive rights be extended to men as well. Stop paternity fraud! Choice for men, now!

I have been an advocate for health care reform, but regrettably have neglected to see the male angle to this. It is unconscionable that there is a federal Office of Women’s Health without a corresponding Office of Men’s Health, when men have a life expectancy nearly 6 years less than women.

While I’m at it, the Violence Against Women Act needs to be reformed to include male victims. I feel a bit contrite here, as it was me that slashed my husband’s face in 1993 simply because Barbara Streisand was visiting the White House. There was no excuse for my violence against Bill, and as president I plan to make it up to the men of America who have been unrepresented in domestic violence services for too long.

And what about IMBRA – that is, the The International Marriage Brokers Regulation Act? How did this unconstitutional law ever get passed? Surely American men as a whole are a decent lot who deserve the opportunity to look for love and marriage overseas without the presumption of being abusers. As president, I will not only repeal this anti-male law, but will push for legislation to protect American men from financial exploitation by unscrupulous foreign women. American men deserve protection too!

Furthermore, as president I will not allow radical feminists to pressure me or Congress into ratifying CEDAW, or the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, in the United States. Not only is this law unnecessary in the United States, but it would be an imposition on the sovereignity of this nation by a small clique of idealogues. Phyllis Schlafly was right about this one.

Now, some of my so-called advocates have tried to pit women’s issues against black issues, and claimed that the former is more important than the latter. Well, all I can say is that there is no comparison between being subject to centuries of slavery followed by another century of Jim Crow laws, and being asked to make coffee.

And what about the boys of this nation. It isn’t fair that the education system in the United States is rigged to favor the learning styles of girls. The Department of Education has pursued this unethical policy for too long, and it needs to be reformed. Our boys don’t need Ritalin – they need an education system that works for them.

We also need to overhaul Title IX. It’s absurd to eliminate college men’s sports teams to create women’s sports teams that aren’t necessarily wanted in order to comply with a rigid quota system. Let’s return Title IX to what it was originally intended to do.

And once our young men enter the workforce, they are discriminated against once again by preferential hiring practices that favor women. Women should be hired on the basis of merit, not favoritism. Also, I no longer believe in the wage gap myth, which fails to take into account the fact that men tend to work longer hours at more dangerous jobs than women.

In conclusion, what I have referred to in the past as the ultimate glass ceiling really only tells half the story. The glass cellars of male disposability, as Warren Farrell terms it, are the other side of the coin that has been overlooked for far too long. The so-called boy’s club of presidential politics in reality has been more about passing legislation to help and protect women than it has been about serving the interests of the common man. As president I plan to return the favor by promoting legislation that helps men for a change.

Thank you, and I hope to receive your vote in November!

*Not really. Happy April Fool’s Day!