Kate vs. Kate

Kate vs. Kate

It was Kate Michelman versus Kate O’Beirne, the gal who was humiliated
by tweety, because she went on "Hardball" with talking points
on Rovegate instead of the facts. The topic was feminism and abortion, as usual, but at least Timmy had on two girls to discuss it, which is rare.

Conservatives weigh in here,
here
and from Kate O’Beirne herself, here.
RedState didn’t cover it. I guess two women talking about a woman’s right to
privacy on "Meet the Press," the day before a new MALE judge is to
go through confirmation hearings, isn’t important to the wingnuts over there.
A male judge who is supposed to replace Sandra Day O’Connor, that is.

Kate O’Beirne is the editor of the National Review, but today she said something
that the "post-feminism" conservative cliterati crowd freak. Feminism is not dead, it’s as powerful as ever.
It’s just that no one wants to use or identify with the word "feminism,"
which has become the other "f" word. O’Beirne went on to explain that
feminism is ingrained in our schools and academia, as well as in our culture and that women promoting feminism are the bad angels in our society. This broad is also probably wearing Maidenform full briefs too.

The right’s Kate went on to spew the scare rhetoric that strong
little girls in school make for wimpy, scared little boys. She also stated that
feminism is about making mothers feel like they’re less important. She needs
to rip off her 1950s girdle and walk into the 21st century. Modern feminists
walked away from that opening salvo a long time ago, embracing the next big mistake of the female revolution, "having
it all," which, if you ask me, was never the point of feminism in the first
place.

Feminism is about total equality, privacy and choice. However, what it isn’t
about is ostracizing women who disagree with one another on what remains the
nuclear issue of the ages, abortion.

Kate
Michelman does a lot for women, which I cannot claim or profess. But today
when she stated that the post-2004 election discussion regarding Democrats being
more flexible on our rhetoric and party policies on abortion was unfortunate,
even a mistake, all I could do was shake my head. But when she inferred that John Kerry’s
comment about welcoming more pro-life people into our party is wrong, I wanted
to reach into the TV and slap her.

Harry Reid is a Democratic Party hero, who is devoutly Mormon and adamantly
pro-life. We should all thank our political stars for Senator Reid.

Pennsylvania State Treasurer Bob Casey Jr. is pro-life and running against
Senator Rick Santorum. Casey has to first win against college professor Chuck
Pennacchio and pension lawyer Alan Sandals, before meeting Santorum.

There are feminist and other liberal blogs fighting against Casey because he’s
not a real Democrat, running Pennacchio ads that say he’s "Fighting
Republicans – Not Acting Like One." Cute, but ridiculous and self-defeating
for Democrats.

Why can’t a feminist be against abortion and pro-life?

The problem with the feminist special interest groups is that they dumb down
the argument to a point where we aren’t getting anywhere. Not realizing that
abortion should be restricted, considering all the contraception at our disposal,
Plan B, as well as other contraception, are feminists going to continue the
offensive rhetoric of pro-abortion talking points?

Of course, for the likes of the conservative cliterati like Kate O’Beirne,
women should not have any privacy at all and the government should have the
last say on what a woman is allowed to do with her own body.

Seriously, isn’t the point to limit abortions, because we simply are not going
to outlaw them in America. The
first politician or political party who tries will be trounced.