AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

Are Men Obsolete?
(By Robin of Berkeley, American Thinker, July 22, 2009)

When I snapped out of my left wing trance last year, I was lost in space. I had no conservative friends and was clueless about web sites and books.

I had heard something vaguely about Talk Radio. So I scanned my AM dial and found Michael Savage. (It took several months, and a chat with a rather bemused new friend, before I even realized there were other hosts as well.)

Being a lifelong liberal, I'd never heard anybody like Savage in my life. He yelled; he called people "vermin." He was unbridled masculinity, not the touchy feeling kind I was used to. And he totally accepted himself: his moods, passion, temper.

But what shocked me the most was his saying that men have become "feminized." I'd never been so offended. "Well, what's wrong with men being more feminine?" I shouted back at my radio. "Is there something wrong with femininity?" Men being way more in touch with their yin and less with their yang sounded good to me.

I hadn't exactly been a big fan of masculinity. Like any good feminist, ranting and raving about men were two of my favorite pastimes. Men frightened me. Testosterone fueled types like Michael Savage scared the bejeezus out of me. I had good reasons, of course, given episodes of harassment and abuse.

I couldn't tune Savage out because he was the only game in town (or so I thought). Also, he was spot on about Obama, and his show was a rich tapestry of politics, philosophy, history, and religion. So I stayed glued.

What a difference a year makes. Now I see Savage as a seer warning us of the dangers we were in for if men went the way of the dinosaur. I had thought taming men's animal nature was a win-win for everybody. Now I realize it was tampering with Mother Nature.

And I have to wonder whether the feminization of men has been an unforeseen result of liberalism or some twisted scheme hatched by the left. In some ways, it feels paranoid to even go there, like I've watched too many sci fi flicks. But at the same time if Professor Bill Ayers and his ilk could plot infiltrating the schools with all things Marxist, why stop there? Why not engineer a designer man who would go along with the liberal flow?

Step one: loosen men up through psychotherapy where they can get in touch with their inner child. Have them exchange their arms for drums that they can pound in the woods with groups of brothers. Teach them to reject logic and lead with their emotions.

Idolize gayness, because after all, aren't gay men just XY versions of the superior women? Degrade anything masculine. Marginalize and vilify the macho types like Savage, by banning him from the U.K.

Hike up the costs of SUV's and trucks, and squeeze men into deracinated cars like the Prius (notice how prissy even the name sounds?) Even better, herd them to work in buses and trains to save the planet (and control them).

Ask the question, as Maureen Dowd did in her bestselling book, "Are Men Necessary?" Answer in the negative by glorifying single mothers and supporting sperm donors. Why bother with a bossy husband when the government can put moms on the dole? And anyway, with gayness being the next big craze, there may be fewer straight men out there.

On the horizon: making the notion of gender arbitrary anyway. Allow people free and easy access to sex change operations (I'll bet good money they will be readily available under ObamaCare.)

Allow children to choose their own sex. (By the way, the fad is already in vogue and called "gender neutrality." Parents don't inform their child of his or her or its gender and let the little mutant choose one.)

Even better, have your child be Bob one day and Becky the next, another hot trend called "gender fluid." It's already happening at a few San Francisco Bay Area schools, where bathrooms are unisex and children get to alter their gender as the mood strikes them.

The piece de resistance of feminization: wreck the economy. If you want to cripple men, rob them of their life spring: their ability to provide for their family. No worries: the government will step in as a worthy substitute.

And the final stroke of genius: disempower the true symbols of masculinity: the military, police, and intelligence officers. Investigate them, sue them, protest them with riots in the street. Make them feel intimidated about doing their jobs. Require them to attend plenty of sensitivity workshops.

So, after decades of my going along like an automaton with the liberal program, I finally got it. As people like Savage have warned us about for years, tampering with gender is a disaster. And not just for men.

Because society shrinks when we are forced to give up who we are, and we become shells of ourselves when we're robbed of our birthright: dignity, freedom, individuality. We become cloned people, with this part and that part, never discovering who we are.

We become what the Tibetans call "hungry ghosts:" tormented beings looking all over for happiness but never finding it because we've forgotten the only place it lives -- in our spirit, which is connected to forces Beyond. We lose forever the knowledge of our true nature that we first glimpsed when we were knee high.

Because the fact is that humans cannot, should not, fool with Mo Nature, shouldn't take nature in our hands and play God. To do so can unleash madness and danger as we know from every horror movie.

Because while we've been engineering a kinder, gentler man, much of the world has been doing the opposite. Countries like Iran and North Korea have been building nuclear weapons and poisoning their young men with hatred of the U.S. They have been making their men stronger, meaner, and better armed.

Liberals: be honest with yourselves. In the end, if the worst case scenario happens (God forbid) and we are attacked, who will you run to? Will you scream out for the Green Czar?

No; all of us, liberals and leftists, conservatives and feminists, we will go where we have always gone from the beginning of time; we will search desperately for the big, strong men to protect us, the ones who have always had the guts, the courage, and yes the cojones, to put their lives and limbs on the line.

The question is: by then, how many will be left?

Liberals: be honest with yourselves. In the end, if the worst case scenario happens (God forbid) and we are attacked, who will you run to? Will you scream out for the Green Czar?

Poll: Palin More Popular Than Pelosi Among Voters
Wednesday, July 29, 2009 10:28 PM
By: Steven Thomma, McClatchy Newspapers

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin is more popular than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, according to a new bipartisan poll released Wednesday.

The Battleground Poll conducted for George Washington University found 42 percent of likely voters have a favorable opinion of Palin, the 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee who stepped down last week as governor of Alaska. The survey found 47 percent had an unfavorable opinion of Palin.

While Palin trailed both President Barack Obama (61 favorable/36 unfavorable) and Vice President Joe Biden (48/38) she easily outpolled Pelosi, the highest ranking elected woman in the country.

The survey found 32 percent of likely voters had a favorable impression of Pelosi, a Democrat from San Francisco, and 51 percent had an unfavorable impression.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., trailed them all in personal popularity, with 15 percent holding a favorable impression and 31 percent having an unfavorable impression.
© 2009 McClatchy-Tribune News Service. Reprinted Via Newscom

Pelosi will never run for president.

Whoever "she" is, do you have any serious quarrel with her general perspectives? Or any particular one?

Foxfyre wrote:

Whoever "she" is, do you have any serious quarrel with her general perspectives? Or any particular one?

What bothers me about "Robin" is that the conversion to conservatism has caused her to embrace simplistic ideas. Her "life history" mentions postgraduate education and professional accomplishment in psychology. Suddenly, she decides that the simple "logic" of talk radio hosts is more instructive. Her new attitude includes believing that liberalism somehow "feminizes" men.

wandeljw wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Whoever "she" is, do you have any serious quarrel with her general perspectives? Or any particular one?

What bothers me about "Robin" is that the conversion to conservatism has caused her to embrace simplistic ideas. Her "life history" mentions postgraduate education and professional accomplishment in psychology. Suddenly, she decides that the simple "logic" of talk radio hosts is more instructive. Her new attitude includes believing that liberalism somehow "feminizes" men.

What do you consider a 'simplistic idea'? Give me an example.

Do you understand how she means that when she says that 'liberalism feminizes men'? Anything specific about that comment with which you disagree?

And the final stroke of genius: disempower the true symbols of masculinity: the military, police, and intelligence officers. Investigate them, sue them, protest them with riots in the street. Make them feel intimidated about doing their jobs. Require them to attend plenty of sensitivity workshops.

wandeljw wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

Whoever "she" is, do you have any serious quarrel with her general perspectives? Or any particular one?

What bothers me about "Robin" is that the conversion to conservatism has caused her to embrace simplistic ideas. Her "life history" mentions postgraduate education and professional accomplishment in psychology. Suddenly, she decides that the simple "logic" of talk radio hosts is more instructive. Her new attitude includes believing that liberalism somehow "feminizes" men.

What do you consider a 'simplistic idea'? Give me an example.

Do you understand how she means that when she says that 'liberalism feminizes men'? Anything specific about that comment with which you disagree?

Step one: loosen men up through psychotherapy where they can get in touch with their inner child. Have them exchange their arms for drums that they can pound in the woods with groups of brothers. Teach them to reject logic and lead with their emotions.

Hike up the costs of SUV's and trucks, and squeeze men into deracinated cars like the Prius (notice how prissy even the name sounds?) Even better, herd them to work in buses and trains to save the planet (and control them).

Allow people free and easy access to sex change operations (I'll bet good money they will be readily available under ObamaCare.)

But one thing I have noticed about liberals is that so many are unable to separate 'statement of fact' from 'exaggeration for effect'

I think such efforts to re-engineer basic social norms has created a society that is more frustrated, less happy, less respectful, and less pleasant.

When there is danger, she wants somebody who has been taught that there is a role for strength and even violence and who will naturally employ that rather than have to depend on some politically correct submissive creature with a feminine side.

Are Men Obsolete?
(By Robin of Berkeley, American Thinker, July 22, 2009)
Like any good feminist, ranting and raving about men were two of my favorite pastimes.

The whole bullhorns on the hood, gunrack across the back, chauvenistic, testosterone laced macho image is seen as ignorant or stupid or crude.