Commenting login:
  • Log-in Edit profile
  • Register Logout

Party of Women

Dr.  Tim Nerenz (an executive in the manufacturing industry and member of the Libertarian Party) recently wrote an article called  "Party of Women."  Dr. Nerenz has given me blanket permission to reprint his writings in their entirety whenever I come across one that I think my readers would enjoy.  Following is Dr. Nerenz's recent thoughts on the White House/leftie attack on Ann Romney.  Very well-written, as usual!  A big thank-you to Dr. Nerenz for allowing me to share his article with my readers.

Here goes:

PARTY OF WOMEN by Dr. Tim Nerenz

OK, now that Ann Romney has been savaged by the White House for breathing without permission, can we quit pretending that Democrats care about women?

Apparently, the powers that be in the 21st century Democrat Party have determined that raising children and running a household is neither important nor difficult.  Not to be compared with something really, really, really valuable like, say, being an activist, consultant, professional protester, community organizer, spokesperson...or Snookie.

But the crime that Mrs. Romney committed against her gender in the eyes of those who make such judgments about women nowadays is not simply that she stayed at home to raise her family, but that she chose  to stay at home and raise her family.  In case you haven't noticed, they don't like us making choices for ourselves.

And adding insult to injury, she relied on her family and faith to empower that choice, not turning to government dependence, elevating her choice a hate crime status to those whose first and only love is government.

The White House attack against Mrs. Romney did not reveal anything new about the self-appointed Party of Women; it merely confirmed what has been obvious to anyone with an independently functioning brain for at least 40 years or more - the leaders of the modern-day Democrat Party believe women are stupid.

That's right - stupid.  Too stupid to make up their own minds, too stupid to make decisions about career paths and vocations, too stupid to form moral and religious positions independently, too stupid to develop a political philosophy, too stupid to make their own way in the world, too stupid to manage contraception, too stupid to raise their own children, and now apparently too stupid to even know whether or not they have ever worked or struggled.

For the record, we libertarians do not think women are stupid.   Well, some are - like whoever said raising five boys is not "work," and that cancer and MS do not count as "struggles."  Or whoever thought attacking the wife of his presumptive opponent would be a good way to get more women to vote for President Obama - that is one stupid fool, right there.

Attacking the spouse of an opponent (gasp) raising her own children won't win over any voters, but it sure did bring out a slew of vulgar tweets from the liberal twittersphere who thumb-hated on Mrs. Romney with gusto for a few days.  If I had used those names for women growing up I would have eaten so much Lava there would still be bubbles every time I burp; the older I get the more I appreciate the difference between being raised and being whelped.

The Obama campaign would like us to believe that the Romneys are too rich and too out-of-touch to serve the people.  And what exactly are we supposed to be afraid of - that Mitt might play too much golf?  Ann might take too many vacations?  They might fly to getaways on separate planes?  Maybe take the grandkids to Cabo for spring break?  How much worse can it be, for heaven's sakes - they call her Michelle Antoinette behind her back.

And it's not like her husband is exactly President Everyman.  How many name-changing illegitimate, interracial sons of Kenyan Marxists do you know who were raised in Indonesia, bankrolled by Chicago con-men, mentored by terrorists and voted "absent" most of the time in the only full time job that appears on their resume prior to coming to Washington, D.C.?

There are only two people on the planet whose opinions about the Romney's life choices matter - Mitt and Ann Romney.  From a distance, it looks like they have done a pretty darn good job of it, and for those yearning to covet, Ann Romney is a target-rich environment - rich, pretty, smart, classy, nice, loving family, married forever to a handsome committed guy who is likely going to be the next President of the United States.  There will be feminists jumping off buildings if it turns out she is musical and athletic and mechanically inclined.

Obsessive covetousness bordering on the insane is about the only explanation for hatching a political strategy that trashes Mrs. Romney's successful career as a household CEO while putting Sandra Fluke on a pedestal for begging us to provide free government contraception.  That doesn't seem like a long way, baby - perhaps that now-infamous women's 17% pay gap in the Obama White House has something to do with the quality of their advice.

We libertarians are neutral on social issues and we don't believe you can either detect or assign a person's political philosophy by peeking down their thong to see what kind of equipment they were born with.  We have this annoying habit of treating each individual person as if they were a fully formed, fully developed and fully sovereign human being with a mind of their own, a heart of their own, and the right to live according to the dictates of their own conscience and beliefs.

Liberty is the absence of government in choice.  Ann Romney made a choice for herself and her family - let freedom ring.  There are plenty of reasons not to vote for Mitt Romney, but she is not one of them.

"Moment of Clarity" is a weekly commentary by Libertarian writer and speaker Tim Nerenz Ph.D. Visit Tim's website to find your moment.

This site uses Facebook comments to make it easier for you to contribute. If you see a comment you would like to flag for spam or abuse, click the "x" in the upper right of it. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use.

Page Tools