National Organization for Leftist Women

NOW, or as I actaully call it NOLW, has posted an article against Sarah Palin on their website.

They make this statement:

“Gov. Palin may be the second woman vice-presidential candidate on a major party ticket, but she is not the right woman. Sadly, she is a woman who opposes women’s rights, just like John McCain.”

Since you call yourself the “National Organization for Women” that would arrogantly indicate that you speak for all women. Since you apparently don’t speak for Sarah Palin and since she so ardantly disagrees with your “Women’s rights” wouldn’t this raise a red flag to consider why she disagrees? Because, she is a woman, not matter how much you might want to fight against that fact. Doesn’t she also have a say on the issue? Or, do you only speak for leftist women and their leftist women’s rights? Because, frankly, I need some clarification. If you only speak for leftist women (which you obviously do) then you should change your name and stop your generalizations as if you speak for ALL women (because you most certainly don’t). Back to my original point, since Sarah Palin is a woman, and she does disagree with you, where does that bring us with the whole “feminist” movement? Could you actually be wrong? (Wow, that’s a shocker!)

Finally, as the chair of NOW’s Political Action Committee, I am frequently asked whether NOW supports women candidates just because they are women. This gives me an opportunity to once again answer that question with an emphatic ‘No.’ We recognize the importance of having women’s rights supporters at every level but, like Sarah Palin, not every woman supports women’s rights.”

The term “women’s rights” seems rather vague. What are “women’s rights”? If you mean the ability to have an abortion done, than yes, Sarah Palin (like most Republicans) wouldn’t agree that women have the right to get an abortion. However, if you mean women equality, then wouldn’t her being a governor and wanting to become the Vice President even indicate in itself that she is striving for what all women want in equality? The ability to do and be anything they set their mind to without limits or boundries. I am sure she is for non-discrimination against women in the workplace, etc… She just draws the line at abortion. Saying, “she is not for women’s rights” is just saying that she is not for your version of women’s rights.

Let me bring this back to my original point. Not every woman supports women’s rights. Think about that for a second. It insinuates that all women should be for women’s rights. Why wouldn’t they be? Right? I mean every woman I know has goals and wants to pursue their dreams. Ask yourself, maybe there is a chance that NOW has taken women’s rights way too far. They have pushed it to a point of madness, immorality, and militancy.

Posted by Alcamadus

Obama Popularity A Mixed Bag

A phenomneon like Obama-mania hasn’t happened since JKF, and now with the capability of the internet and technology, it spreads even faster. However, for all the people that are extremely ecstatic about Barack Obama, there are just as many people who aren’t. The polls since even before Obama got the nomination have shown that many voters are wary of Obama. In fact, there are a lot of people out there that can’t stand the guy, nor would trust him to be the President.

With this being a clear and present danger to the Obama campaign, the Democrats and Obama are scrambling to turn that around. I think they are all shocked at how close the polls are, especially with so many factors that should be used in their favor. Everyone is making excuses, especially as if McCain is just getting lucky. But, I have a good theory to why things are not a sure thing for the Democrats and Obama.

Listen very carefully: THE NATION IS DIVIDED.

Never since the Civil War has the nation been so divided on polarizing issues. Abortion, Homosexual Marriage, Universal Healthcare, and Foreign Policy are just a few of the hardcore issues that both Democrats and Republicans are not willing to be swayed on. This makes it difficult for anyone to come to a bipartisan common ground, which means that one side is going to get their way eventually. That power struggle is what we are seeing right now in the polls. It is what we saw with how close the elections were with Bush and Gore and Bush and Kerry. Somehow, I think the Democrats are underestimating the resolve that hardcore Republicans have toward these issues. They aren’t just going to say “mercy” and let go. This means that this election is going to be just as close as it was in 2000 and 2004.

With that said, do not be surprised if either of the candidates barely squeak by in this election. Until one side gains an overwhelming majority (which won’t happen), this nation will be divided for a long time and political struggle like this will be a constant.

Posted by Alcamadus